Disposed

Somnath Dnyaneshwar Dhuri v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Jun 2024WP/2528/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a habeas corpus petition filed by the father. Since the minor child was already present with the mother, the writ was unnecessary. The court ordered future access visits for the petitioner. Parties were directed to adhere to residence and visitation conditions.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition stands disposed off. Mother undertook to reside with parents and inform police of address changes. Petitioner granted access on Sundays.

Somnath Dnyaneshwar Dhuri vs State of… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1/2 903 WP 2528-24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2528 OF 2024

¶3

Somnath Dnyaneshwar Dhuri .. Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Maharashtra and Ors .. Respondents …

¶6

Ms. Swapna Kode (thr. VC) for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay Garad for respondent nos.2, 3 and 4. Respondent no. 2, along with child and respondent nos.3 and 4 present in before the Court.

¶7

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : 27^th JUNE, 2024

¶8

P.C:-

¶9

1 As directed earlier, Mrs. Shweta Somnath Dhuri, the respondent no.2, is present along with the child Sai and when we interacted with her, she informed that at present she is staying with one of her friend, but within two days she will shift to her parents house i.e. the house of respondent nos.3 and 4.

¶10

Since we have noticed that the child is safe in her custody, we do not desire to entertain the present Writ Petition seeking issuance of Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus to secure his presence, as the child is present before the Court.

¶11

At the same time, the petitioner being the father of the minor child is also entitled to know his whereabouts and therefore, the respondent no.2, Shweta has undertaken to continue to reside with

¶12

Ashish

¶13

2/2 903 WP 2528-24.doc

¶14

her parents house i.e. B-68, Shashtri Nagar, near Shiv Temple, Pratiksha Nagar, Sion, Mumbai, and in case of any change in her address, she shall keep Wadala T.T. Police Station apprise about the same.

¶15

2 Mrs. Shweta, has also agreed that she would permit to the petitioner to meet the child on every Sunday between 4:00 p.m to 6:00 p.m., in Chintamani garden, Sion, which is located near her parental residence and which is also closer for the petitioner. It is open for the respondent no.2, to be present in the garden along with the child, but the child shall be permitted to be independently in the company of his father for the period of two hours.

¶16

With this aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed off.

¶17

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE,J)

¶18

(BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶19

Ashish

Somnath Dnyaneshwar Dhuri v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Somnath Dnyaneshwar Dhuri v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

National Spot Exchange Ltd. vs State Bank of India

Dr Yamini Suhas Chaudhari vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pooja Gagan Jain vs State of Maharashtra

Lakhma Indya Choudhary vs the State of Maharashtra

Tabrez @ Tabbu Darvesh Khan vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sunil Karbhari Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra