IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Mandeep ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab and others ....Respondents Date of decision: 21.04.2026 Date of Uploading : 22.04.2026 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. G.S. Bhullar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Malkiat Singh Hundal, Advocate for the respondent Nos.4 and 5.

*****

SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for production of the minor child, namely Gurshan Sandhu and for his release from the alleged illegal custody of respondent Nos.4 and 5. In addition thereto, ancillary relief(s), including appointment of a Warrant Officer to search the detenue and to produce him before this Court have also been sought.

2. Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of the lis in hand is adumbrated, thus:

The case set up by the petitioner is that she is the biological mother and natural guardian of the minor child aged about 10 years. It has been stated in the petition that the father of the child namely Bikram Singh @ Bikaram Sandhu, is lodged in District Jail Mansa, in connection with a criminal case and taking undue advantage of his incarceration, respondent Nos.4 and 5 have forcibly and illegally detained the minor child. The petitioner has further alleged that the child is being kept at Tarn Taran and she has been restrained from meeting him. It has been further contended that such custody is wholly illegal, without any authority of law and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

It is in this factual backdrop, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking issuance of a writ of habeas corpus and for issuance of search warrants for production of the minor child before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner is the biological mother and natural guardian of the minor child namely Gurshan Sandhu, who is of tender age and requires care, protection and emotional support under her supervision. Learned counsel has further iterated that the continued separation of the minor from the petitioner is detrimental to his welfare and overall development. It has been further contended that the present petition has been filed due to the illegal and unlawful custody of the minor child by respondent Nos.4 and 5. Learned counsel has emphasized that the petitioner, being the natural mother, has an inherent and indefeasible right to the care, custody and companionship of the minor child and the action(s) of the respondent Nos.4 and 5 in depriving her of such access are arbitrary and unlawful and against the welfare of the child. It has been further contended that the father of minor child was in judicial custody and taking undue advantage of the said situation, respondent Nos.4 and 5 forcibly and illegally took custody of the minor child without any authority of the law. It has been further submitted that entrusting the custody of a minor child to a third party, particularly in the absence of the father and without the consent of the mother, is per se illegal and contrary to the welfare of the child. It has been further contended that the petitioner has approached the local police authorities seeking intervention, however, no effective action has been taken which compelled the petitioner to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. Moreover, the alleged illegal detention of the minor child amounts to a violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel has emphasized that the welfare of the minor child is of paramount consideration and his continued custody with respondent Nos4 and 5 is neither lawful nor in his best interest. On the basis of aforesaid submissions, it has been prayed that this Court may issue a writ