IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

285

CRWP-8062-2023 (O&M)

Date of decision: 19.12.2025

Manik Dawar ...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present:- Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with

Mr. Arnav Ghai, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Viren Jain, Advocate and

Ms. Jyoti Negi, Advocate

for respondent No. 4.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking issuance of writ in the nature of habeas corpus for obtaining the custody of his minor children, namely Vidhaan Dawar and Rehmat Dawar, who are alleged to

be in illegal custody of respondents No. 4 to 6.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts of the case as per the petition and as argued by learned senior counsel for the petitioner are that the marriage of the petitioner with respondent No. 4, namely Vidhi Dawar, was solemnized on 13.02.2009 at Ludhiana according to Hindu rites and rituals. Out of the said wedlock, two children were born, namely a son, Vidhaan Dawar, on 03.03.2010 and a daughter, Rehmat Dawar, on 06.06.2015. The matrimonial life

of the parties remained cordial till the year 2020. However, thereafter, the conduct of respondent No. 4 underwent a sudden change, and she started residing separately by sleeping in a different room from the petitioner. The petitioner got his son admitted in Woodstock School, Mussorie in 6^th Class but due to outbreak of Covid-19, the classes were being conducted online. In the month of June, 2021, respondent No. 4 along with the children had gone to his parental home and refused to come back. A panchayat was convened and only then she came back to her matrimonial home. It is further submitted that on 08.03.2022, the petitioner along with respondent No. 4 and their minor children travelled to Mussoorie for dropping their son, Vidhaan, at his school. After dropping the child, respondent No. 4 left with the minor daughter, Rehmat, on the pretext of visiting her parental home but thereafter neither returned to the matrimonial home nor permitted the petitioner to meet or interact with the minor daughter. Subsequently, respondent No. 4 continuously obstructed the petitioner from meeting and communicating with both minor children. Despite arrangements made through the school regarding custody during vacations, respondent No. 4, after taking Vidhaan during Summer vacation in May 2023, deliberately failed to send him back to school upon reopening. She further prevented all communication between the petitioner and the minor children and blocked the petitioner’s contact and denied him access to the children even upon personal visits. She, without the consent of the petitioner, attempted to withdraw the minor son from his school, thereby adversely affecting his education. The same was objected to by the petitioner and kept in abeyance by the school authorities. The petitioner has at all times been actively involved in the upbringing, education, and welfare of the minor children. The conduct of respondent No. 4 is solely intended to alienate the children from the petitioner and to deprive them of paternal care and affection. The continued denial of access and communication is detrimental to the welfare and best interests of the minor children, warranting immediate intervention by this Hon’ble Court.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has further agued that respondent No. 4 has forcibly taken the custody of the minor children from the petitioner and the act of respondent No. 4 is not only illegal but also amounts to cruelty to the petitioner as well as children as they are of tender age and needed the care and company of father also for their proper upbringing. While submitting that the private respondents are mistreating the minor children and not maintaining them properly, it is urged that