Dismissed

Naman Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC17 Aug 2023HABC/634/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Habeas corpus petition regarding custody of a minor son. Corus expressed willingness to reside with respondent father. Visitation request rejected; petitioner directed to appropriate application. Petition dismissed due to established fact and lack of cause of action.

What did the court decide?

Custody of minor to mother rejected; visitation request dismissed. Case finally disposed of.

Naman Agrawal and Another Vs State of U.P… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165404

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 634 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Naman Agrawal And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Prakash Dwivedi,Pranshu Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Saroj Kumar Yadav,Vikram Bahadur Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A for respondent nos. 1 to 3, Sri Vikram Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4 and perused the record.

¶7

Present writ petition has been filed for following relief:

¶8

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of habeas corpus commanding and directing the respondent nos. 3 and 4 to produce the petitioner no. 1 (corpus) namely minor son Naman Agarwal from the custody of respondent no.4 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶9

(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to handover the custody of petitioner no.1 (corpus) namely minor son Naman Agarwal to her natural guardian mother petitioner no.2 in the above noted habeas corpus writ petition."

¶10

This Court vide order dated 26.07.2023 directed the Station House Officer, Police Station Sikandra, District Agra as well as respondent no.4 to ensure the presence of the corpus before this Court today. In pursuance thereof, the corpus is present before the Court today.

¶11

After interacting with the corpus, he made a statement that he is willing to reside with his father-respondent no.4. The petitioner no.1 is also present in the Court and she made a request for visitation rights.

¶12

This Court is not inclined to entertain the request made by petitioner no.1. Insofar as a claim with regard to visitation rights is concerned, it is always open to petitioner no.1 to avail the remedy by moving an appropriate application before the court concerned.

¶13

In view of the statement of fact made by the corpus- Naman Agarwal, no cause of action survives in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the same is finally disposed of.

¶14

(Donadi Ramesh, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 17.8.2023 Noman

¶16

Digitally signed by :- NOMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Naman Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naman Agrawal and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mustkeem and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Om Prakash Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Rachana Soni and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Aneeta Verma Vs Rishipal

Smt. Neha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others