IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

109+252 CRWP-3633-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 18.02.2026 Simran Chanana ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- Mr. Simranjot Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Senior DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Lakshay Bector, Advocate for respondents No. 6 to 8.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

1. CRM-W-68-2026 Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions.

Documents are taken on record.

2. CRWP-3633-2025 (O&M)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the nature of habeas corpus for obtaining the custody of her minor daughter namely Radhya, who is alleged to be in illegal custody of respondents No. 6 to 8.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that her marriage was solemnized with respondent No. 6-Deepam Khurana on 22.11.2019. Out of the said wedlock, a female child, namely Radhya, was born on 23.08.2020, who is the alleged detenue. It is further submitted that sufficient dowry was given by her parents in the marriage but respondents No. 6 to 8 raised demand of more dowry, due to which, their relations became sour and due to non-fulfillment of their demand, she was extended beatings and thrown out of her matrimonial house on 21.04.2024. Subsequently, these respondents had taken the custody of the minor child on 06.11.2024 from outside of her school on the pretext that her grandparents wanted to see her but they never handed over her custody to the petitioner. The petitioner had made complaints to the police authorities but to no avail. Subsequently, a compromise was effected between the parties on 31.07.2024 but the same was not honoured by these respondents. The petitioner has filed a petition under the provisions of the Guardians & Wards Act for obtaining permanent custody of the child, which is pending before the Family Court, Ferozepur. Apart from that, the petitioner has filed some other litigations against respondents No. 6 to 8, which are pending adjudication.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that respondents No. 6 to 8 have fraudulently taken the custody of the minor child from the petitioner and the act of these respondents is not only illegal but also amounts to cruelty to the petitioner as well as to the child as she was of tender age and needed the care and company of her mother for her upbringing. Since her birth, the child has been in custody of the petitioner and she has been the sole caregiver of the child. The petitioner had got the child admitted in a reputed school and he was pursuing her studies. However, by removing her from the lawful custody of the petitioner, respondents No. 6 to 8 have seriously posed danger to her overall development. While submitting that respondent No. 6 to 8 are mistreating the minor child and not maintaining her properly, it is urged that a writ of habeas corpus be issued for release of the alleged detenue.

5. Learned State counsel has submitted that the directions issued by this Court shall be complied with.

6. Reply, on behalf of respondents No. 6 to 8, has been filed, wherein while denying the allegations as levelled by the petitioner, it is submitted that since respondent No. 6 is natural father of the child, she cannot be stated to be in illegal custody of the father and the present petition is not maintainable. It is submitted that respondent No. 4 has never mistreated the child and rather, he is properly taking care of the child, being her father and is also discharging his responsibilities properly. It is also submitted that even he had never caused any harassment to the petitioner and she had left the company of respondent out of her own free will. The child has been admitted in a better school and is getting her preliminary education. Learned counsel for respondents No. 6 to 8 has relied upon Pawan Kumar Kathuroj