Dismissed¶¶12

Arv (Minor) Thru. His Father Himanshu Bharti Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 7 Others

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2025HABC/25/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: habeas corpus; child custody; minor detenue; maternal grandparents (nana and nani); custody transfer to father; mother on Kumbh Mela duty; parents both police constables / Head Constable; earlier order dated 24.09.2024 in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.106/2024; writ petition dismissed. Parties: Arv (minor) thru. father Himanshu Bharti Nishad v. State of U.P.; respondent no.4 Sindhu Bind (mother). Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench; Judge: Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.; Order Date 30.1.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:6336.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition seeking production of the child and transfer of custody to the father was dismissed as devoid of merit. ¶¶12

Arv (Minor) Thru. His Father Himanshu Bharti Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition seeking production of the child and transfer of custody to the father was dismissed as devoid of merit.

¶¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the custody of the minor petitioner (aged about 6), who was handed over to his mother by the father's consent and now lives with his maternal grandparents while the mother discharges Kumbh Mela police duty, should be transferred from the mother to the father via habeas corpus.

¶¶8

Court's answer

Since the mother is discharging her duties in Kumbh Mela, the living of the child with his maternal grandparents (nana and nani) cannot be said to be illegal custody at all.

¶¶11

Ratio / Principle

No other person can look after the welfare of the child better than his nana and nani, where the petitioner (the father) refuses to bring him up and had already handed over the custody of the child to the mother.

¶¶11

Key takeaways

As a factual basis for dismissal, the Court found that the child was handed over to respondent no.4 Sindhu Bind by the petitioner himself without any objection, consistent with this Court's earlier order.ratio¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 25 of 2025 (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench; Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.; Order Date 30.1.2025): A minor boy (about 6 years old), through his father Himanshu Bharti Nishad, sought a writ of habeas corpus directing production of the child and transfer of his custody from the mother, respondent no.4 Sindhu Bind, to the father. An earlier habeas corpus petition (No.106/2024) filed by the wife had been decided on 24.09.2024, handing the child over to the mother with the petitioner's consent; the child was thereafter living with his maternal grandparents because the mother, a police Head Constable like the father, was deployed on Kumbh Mela duty. Held: the child's residence with his nana and nani is not illegal custody; the child's welfare is best looked after by the grandparents, the father having refused to bring him up and having himself handed custody to the mother. Petition dismissed as devoid of merit.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6336

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 25 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Arv (Minor) Thru. His Father Himanshu Bharti Nishad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Roshan Lal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present writ petition has been moved with prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus commanding and directing to the opposite parties to produce the petitioner (detenue) before this Hon'ble Court and he may be set at liberty under the care and custody of his father.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in this case respondent no.4 Sindhu Bind and Arv aged about 6 years are wife and son of the petitioner. Further submitted that previously a Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.106/2024 was filed before this Court by the wife for transferring the custody of child which was decided on 24.09.2024 and child was handed over in the custody of mother Sindhu Bind with consent of petitioner but now the child is not living with her but with his maternal grand-parents (nana and nani). Further submitted that the custody of child was given to the mother but she is keeping him with grand-parents which cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, requested to transfer the custody in his favour from the mother of the son.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and contended that as per the instructions from the concerned police station since the husband and wife both are constable in Police Department and now the wife Sindhu Bind is performing her duties in Kumbh Mela as Head Constable and child is living with his maternal grand parents (nana and nani), therefore, it cannot be said to be illegal custody.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well

¶11

as learned A.G.A., the order passed by this Court dated 24.09.2024, the instructions as received by the learned A.G.A., it transpires that child was handed over to the respondent no.4 Sindhu Bind by the petitioner himself without any objection and the aforesaid order was passed by this Court. Now she is discharing her duties in Kumbh Mela, therefore, the living of the child with his nana and nani cannot be said to be illegal custody at all. No other person can look after the welfare of the child than his nana and nani where the petitioner (the father) refuses to bring him up and handed over the custody of the child to the mother. Hence, this writ petition being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 30.1.2025 Ashok Gupta

¶14

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arv (Minor) Thru. His Father Himanshu Bharti Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arv (Minor) Thru. His Father Himanshu Bharti Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Faiz Mohd. and 6 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Prasad and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Seema Pandey @ Shweta Pandey Thru. Her Father Ganesh Shankar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 5 Others

Smt. Mamta Yadav Thru. Her Husband Beni Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Gangoo @ Ganga Ram and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Vishram Vs Ranvijay Pratap Singh and Another