In habeas corpus writ petition No. 147 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court rejected the maintainability of the petition challenging a child's custody. Citing a prior Child Welfare Committee order and a full court judgment (Km. Rachna), the court held the custody was legal and dismissed the petition.
Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 65
Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 147 of 2022
Petitioner :- Smt. Jainab Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anuj Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Amit Rana, holding brief of Sri Anuj Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed habeas corpus writ petition on behalf of petitioners Smt. Jainab and Rakib.
Learned A.G.A. at the out set contains that this habeas corpus petition is not maintainable in the light of the judicial order dated 15.12.2021 passed by Child Welfare Committee, Bijnor whereby the corpus is the girl has been handed over to her parents.
This is the judicial order by which the custody of the child has been handed over and thus by no stretch of imagination it would be said that the corpus is illegal detention of her parents. Moreover, there is a full court judgment of this court in Km. Rachna and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 362 of 2020 and thus this habeas corpus writ petition is not maintainable and as such accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.3.2022 Vikram
Digitally signed by VIKRAM SINGH Date: 2022.04.01 11:12:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the habeas corpus writ petition challenging the custody of a child is maintainable given a prior Child Welfare Committee order and Supreme Court/High Court precedent.
Whether the detention of the child constitutes illegal detention under the facts and applicable judicial orders.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Km. Rachna and Another Vs. State of U.P. and OthersApplied¶8
Km. Rachna and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others passed in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 362 of 2020
Smt. Jainab and Rakib
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
