Shaik Shahira Bano Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Shaik Shahira Bano Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim supervised visitation: the petitioner (maternal grandmother) is permitted to interact with her minor granddaughter for one hour on every alternate Sunday between 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon for four weeks, confined to two visits on 18.05.2025 and 01.06.2025, at Family Court, Guntur (venue acceptable to both sides), with a Court staff member present and adequate security; the writ petition is disposed of leaving the petitioner free to approach the Family Court on custody; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of habeas corpus should issue directing the official respondents to produce and protect the life and liberty of the petitioner's minor granddaughter Shaik Aayat, who was allegedly taken away and kept in the custody of respondent No. 5 (the child's father), and to restore her to the petitioner's custody. +2 more

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the Family Court on the question of custody.

Ratio / Principle

Questions of custody of the child and whether such custody would be for her benefit are matters to be dealt with by the Family Court; this Court cannot go into those issues.

Key takeaways

Since the alleged detenue had been brought up by the petitioner till about three years back, it is appropriate that some access be given to the petitioner.ratio¶¶56
By way of interim measure, for a period of four weeks the petitioner is permitted to interact with the child for one hour on every alternate Sunday between 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon.ratio¶¶61
The visitation order is confined to two visits within the aforesaid four weeks: the first on 18.05.2025 and the second on 01.06.2025.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Habeas corpus writ petition under Article 226 by a maternal grandmother (Shaik Shahira Bano) seeking production of her granddaughter 'Shaik Aayat' — described as aged 5 years in the petition and as seven years in the body of the order — allegedly forcibly taken away by her father, respondent No. 5 (Shaik Sardar Ahamed). After interacting with the parties, noting deep distrust between them, and recording that a consensual reference to mediation had failed, the Division Bench (order per Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) held that the question of custody and whether custody would be for the child's benefit are matters for the Family Court, which the writ Court cannot decide. The writ petition was disposed of leaving the petitioner free to approach the Family Court. As an interim measure, supervised visitation was granted at Family Court, Guntur — a neutral venue acceptable to both sides — permitting the petitioner to interact with the child for one hour on every alternate Sunday between 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon over four weeks, capped at two visits (18.05.2025 and 01.06.2025), with a Court staff member present and adequate security. No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

o
-0
li:
O 1.
ov>?

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO^&/^'‘*^^

AND

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 2566 OF 2024

Between:

Shaik Shahira Bano, D/o. Babji Aged 48 years, Occ. Housewife R/o. 3- 6-124-2, Ali Nagar, Ward No.22, Repalle, Bapatia District, Estrwhile Guntur District.

...Petitioner

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

The Superintendent of Police, Bapatia District at Bapatia, Erstwhile Guntur District.

The Inspector of Police, Bapatia Circle, Bapatia Town, Bapatia District, Erstwhile Guntur District.

The Station House Officer, Repalle Police Station, Bapatia District, Erstwhile Guntur District.

Shaik Sardar Ahamed, S/o. Abdul Shamshare Tabraz, Aged. 36 years Occ. Private Job, R/o. 22-13-4/2, Itikapadu Road, Eidgah, 27*^ Ward, Ponnuru, Guntur District.

...Respondents

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS directing the respondents^2to4to produce and protect the life and liberty of the petitioners minor grand daughter by name, Shaik Aayat, aged 5 years, who was taken away and kept in the illegal custody of Respondent by deceitful means and

consequently direct the respondents to trace whereabouts of detenue and place her to her custody by removing from that of S**" respondent, in the fnf^rest of justice.

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 particularly 4**^ respondent to produce the victim person, who is the petitioners minor grand-daughter by name Shaik Aayat, aged about 5 years, before this Hon’ble Court by removing from the illegal custody of 5*'^ Respondent and place her to her custody, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition.

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI PASALAPUDI SATYA HARITHA Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 4: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: SRI A.V. PARADHASARADHI The Court made the following order:

V

APHe010047S22024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AIIVIARAVATI

[3525]

(Specicil Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AMD TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

Vi/RIT PETITION NO: 2566/2024

Between:

Shaik Shahira Bano

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Ap and Others

...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.PASALAPUD1 SATYA HARITHA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1 .THE ADVOCATE GENERAL (AP)

The Court made the following Order: (perHonble sn justice^{R.RaghunandanRao)}

The petitioner, who is the maternal grandmother of^{theallegeddetenue}

has approached this Court by way of the present \Nn{^{Petition,contendingthat} her granddaughter, the alleged detenue, has been forcibly^{takenawaybythe} 5“" respondent, who is the father of the alleged detenue^{andthatcustody} should be restored to her.

th 2. We have interacted with both the petitioner as well^asthe5 respondent and it appears that there is a deep distrust^{betweenbothparties.}

2

'•t

In that view of the matter, a reference had been made to meditation, with the consent of both parties. However, the learned mediator had reported that the issue could not be resolved.

In view of the fact that the 5’^ respondent is the^father of the alleged detenue, v^/ho is a girl aged seven years, it would not be appropriate for this Court to go into the question of whether custody can be given or not and whether such custody v^/ould be for the benefit^{ofthechildornot.}

These are issues which would have to be dealt with by the f-amily Court and this Court cannot go into these issues.

However, keeping in view of the fact that the alleged^detenuehad been brought up by the petitioner till three years back, it would only be appropriate that some access be given to the petitioner.

The 5*^ respondent has expressed his doubt as to the physical and mental safety of the child if she is left alone with the petitioner. On the other hand, the petitioner contends that meeting the^{childinthehouseofthe} 5^^ respondent would not be conducive for the child and there would be every occasion for confrontation between the parties.

In view of the aforesaid reservations, expressed by both sides, it would only be appropriate to permit the petitioner to meet the alleged detenue in a neutral place which would also have appropriate security and supervision.

After, consulting both sides, it appears that the Family Court Guntur, is an acceptable place for both sides.

\

3

In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the Family Court. As an interim measure, for a period of four weeks, the petitioner shall be permitted to interact with the child, for one hour, on every alternate Sunday between^{11.00amto12.00} noon. The Learned Judge of the Family Court, Guntur shall make appropriate arrangements for the said interaction. The Learned Judge of the Family Court, Guntur shall also make arrangements for a staff member of the Court to be present during the interaction and with adequate security.

This Order of visitation is only for two visits, in the aforesaid four weeks. The first visit is to be, on 18.05.2025 and the second visit is to be, on 01.06.2025. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending rnilscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

closed.

, //TRUE COPY//

To, ^ Secretary to Government, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

The Superintendent of Police, Bapatia District at Bapatia, Erstwhile Guntur District.

The Inspector of Police, Bapatia Circle, Bapatia Town, Bapatia District Erstwhile Guntur District.

^.^3tion House Officer, Repalle Police Station, Bapatia District

Erstwhile Guntur District.

One CC to Sri Pasalapudi Satya Haritha, Advocate [OPUC]

One CC to Sri A.V. Paradhasaradhi, Advocate [OPUC]

The Advocate General, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

Two CD Copies

RAM

HIGH COURT

DATED:05/05/2025

ORDER

WP.No.2566 of 2024

■gf ANDff^
X 09 MAY 2025
^ Current Section ^

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS