Dismissed

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Oct 2023WPHC/57/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India sought a writ of Habeas Corpus for custody of minor children. The High Court held that custody and visitation rights must be decided by the Family Court and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The habeas corpus petition was dismissed, and parties were directed to approach the Family Court for appropriate orders regarding custody and visitation rights.

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar Vs State of Karnataka — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:37574-DB WPHC No. 57 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

¶8

WPHC NO. 57 OF 2023

¶9

Digitally signed by YASHODHA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MR. KARAN CHANDRASHEKAR S/O MR. CHANDRASHEKHAR AGE ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT UNIT NO. K6, NO.480 13^TH MAIN, 3^RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034.

¶12

MR. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE T.M. ANJENEYALU AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT UNIT NO.K6, NO. 480, 13^TH MAIN, 3^RD BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034.

¶13

MRS. KRIPA CHANDRASHEKAR W/O MR. A.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED AROUND 63 YEARS RESIDING AT UNIT NO. K6, NO. 480 13^TH MAIN, 3^RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA

¶14

BANGALORE–560 034. …PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SMT. JAYNA KOTHARI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SHRI. V. NAVEEN CHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:37574-DB WPHC No. 57 of 2023

¶17

AND:

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA HOME DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶19

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE BY KORAMANGALA POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560 034.

¶20

SMT. DIVYA .K.C W/O KARANA CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.161 6^TH CROSS, 1^ST MAIN, ST BED LAYOUT 1^ST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034.

¶21

ABHINAV LAL S/O MR. PRADEEP LAL AGED 37 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.161, 6^TH CROSS 1^ST MAIN, ST BED LAYOUT 1^ST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 034.

¶22

MR. PRADEEP LAL S/O LATE MR. RATAN LAL AGED 67 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.161, 6^TH CROSS 1^ST MAIN, ST BED LAYOUT 1^ST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE–560 034. …RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SHRI. M.V. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SHRI. S.S. NAGANAND, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. S.K. PRATHIMA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R4 AND R5 ARE SERVED)

¶24

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:37574-DB WPHC No. 57 of 2023

¶25

THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, BY THE PETITIONER, WHEREIN HE PRAYS THAT THE HONBLE COURT BE PLEASED TO ISSUE A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.3, 4 AND 5 TO SECURE THE MINOR CHILDREN KAVIN CHANDRASHEKHAR AGED 4 YEARS AND AANYA AGED 1 YEAR, AND PRODUCE THE MINOR CHILDREN AND HAND OVER THE CUSTODY OF THE SAID MINOR CHILDREN TO THE PETITIONERS WHO IS THE FATHER AND THE GRANDPARENTS OF THE MINOR.

¶26

THIS WPHC, COMING ON FOR ORDERS , THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J. , MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Heard Smt.Jayna Kothari, learned Senior Advocate for

¶29

the petitioners, Shri M.V.Anoop Kumar, learned HCGP for respondents No.1 & 2 and Shri S.S.Naganand, learned Senior Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶30

Admittedly, custody of two minor children is with third respondent-Smt.K.C.Divya, who is their natural mother. We have heard this writ petition on several dates. The principal contention urged on behalf of the petitioner is that there is some threat by fourth respondent because he is involved in a POCSO¹ case and the children are residing in the same house.

¶31

1 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences

¶32

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:37574-DB WPHC No. 57 of 2023

¶33

Yesterday, during the course of hearing, we had expressed that it is a case in which first petitioner, who is the father of minor children has to seek appropriate orders from the Family Court with regard to custody or visitation rights. Smt.Kothari had requested that during the Dasara vacation, first petitioner may be permitted to meet the children in a common place. Accordingly, by consent of learned advocates on both sides, yesterday, children were taken to a common place for meeting. Today, Smt.Kothari submitted that there were some emotional issues and therefore, third respondent-mother may be directed to send the children to petitioners’ house.

¶34

In substance, petitioners’ prayer is to pass orders with regard to visitation rights. In our considered opinion, the said aspect has to be decided by the Family Court. In that view of the matter and in view of our finding that custody of minor children are with the natural mother, this habeas corpus petition is dismissed by relegating the

¶35

NC: 2023:KHC:37574-DB WPHC No. 57 of 2023

¶36

¶37

parties to the Family Court to seek appropriate orders as

¶38

may be advised.

¶39

All contentions of parties are kept open. We make it

¶40

clear that as and when moved, the Family Court shall pass orders wholly uninfluenced by the observations made by this Court.

No costs.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Puravankara Limited Vs Prakash S D

Smt. Rukmini Vs Smt. Veeramma

Karan Chandrashekar Vs Divya. K. C.

The Registrar Vs Sri C L Kittur

Kumari Punya Vs Kuppunda Rajappa

Smt Roopa K T Vs Kum Shruthi K T