Dismissed¶48

Pradeepa Thear Madhavan @ Pradeepa T M v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC12 Nov 2025WPHC/112/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court habeas corpus dismissal: father's WP(HC) No.112/2025 for minor child Rishika T.N. held not maintainable where child is in mother's (respondent No.4 Sushma M. B.) custody; custody grievance routed to Family Court under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890; related matters: mediation agreement MC No.6221/2021 (Family Court Bengaluru) and pending G & WC No.5007/2025 (III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Anekal); bench Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil; filed under Articles 226 and 227; outcome: dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The allegation in the writ petition itself is that the minor child is in the custody of respondent No.4, who is the mother. ¶42

Pradeepa Thear Madhavan @ Pradeepa T M Vs… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition (habeas corpus) seeking custody of the minor child Rishika T.N., alleged to be illegally detained by respondent No.4, is maintainable. +1 more

¶48

Court's answer

The allegation in the writ petition itself is that the minor child is in the custody of respondent No.4, who is the mother.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition (habeas corpus) is not maintainable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶48

Key takeaways

It is for the writ petitioner to approach the appropriate Family Court and seek remedy under the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 for any grievance with regard to custody of the child.ratio¶46
Since a Guardians and Wards Act petition (G & WC No.5007/2025) has already been filed by respondent No.4, it is for the writ petitioner to appear in the said proceeding and take appropriate steps in accordance with law.ratio¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) No. 112 of 2025, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, decided 12-11-2025 by Anu Sivaraman and Vijaykumar A. Patil (judgment per Anu Sivaraman). Petitioner Pradeepa Thear Madhavan @ Pradeepa T M, father of minor child Rishika T.N., sought a writ of habeas corpus claiming the child was illegally detained by respondent No.4 Sushma M. B., the mother. The court noted the parents married in 2007 and the child was born on 28.12.2013; a mediation agreement on custody was reached before the Family Court, Bengaluru in MC No.6221/2021, whose terms respondent No.4 allegedly violated; respondent No.4 had also filed G & WC No.5007/2025 under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Anekal. Observing that on the petition's own allegation the child is in the mother's custody, the court held the habeas corpus writ petition not maintainable, directed the petitioner to seek custody remedies through the appropriate Family Court under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and to appear in the pending G & WC proceeding, and dismissed the petition.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:46001-DB WPHC No. 112 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION HABEAS CORPUS NO.112 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PRADEEPA THEAR MADHAVAN @ PRADEEPA T M S/O MADHAVAN T.C AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.005, GROUND FLOOR DAFFODIL NEST THALACAUVERY LAYOUT 4TH CROSS, BASAVANAGAR BUS STAND MARATHAHALLI POST BANGALORE 560 037.

¶9

Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

NOW RESIDING AT SRIVARA BUILDING KALLAPPA COLONY VVK NAGAR, GONIKOPPAL PONNAMPET TALUK KARNATAKA 571213.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SMT. MANJULA M. S., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA HOME DEPARTMENT

¶15

VIDHANA SOUDHA

¶16

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:46001-DB WPHC No. 112 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

BENGALURU 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

¶20

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU CITY NO.2, ALI ASKER ROAD VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATAKA - 560 001.

¶21

STATION HOUSE OFFICER SURYA NAGAR POLICE STATION ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU 560 099.

¶22

SUSHMA M. B.

¶23

AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.16, TRANQUIL RESIDENCY NARAYANAGATTA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT 560 099.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. B. A. BELLIAPPA, SPP-I WITH SRI. THEJESH P., HCGP FOR R1 TO R3)

¶26

THIS WP(HC) IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO SECURE THE MINOR CHILD RISHIKA T. N. BEING ILLEGALLY DETAINED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 AND ENSURING THE CUSTODY OF THE MINOR CHILD TO THE PETITIONER.

¶27

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:46001-DB WPHC No. 112 of 2025

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶31

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶32

(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN)

¶33

This writ petition (Habeas Corpus) is filed seeking the

¶34

following reliefs;

¶35

"A. Issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to secure the minor child Rishika T N being illegally detained by the respondent No. 4 and ensuing the custody of the minor child to the petitioner in the interest of justice and equity.

¶36

B. Pass any such order/writ/direction that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity."

¶37

We heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner as well as the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents- State.

¶38

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:46001-DB WPHC No. 112 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

We notice from the pleadings in the writ petition that the writ petitioner and respondent No.4 were married in the year 2007 and a child was born on 28.12.2013 to them. The pleadings in the writ petition are that there was a mediation agreement entered into between the petitioner and respondent No.4 before the Family Court, Bengaluru, in MC No.6221/2021 with regard to custody of the child and that the terms of the said mediation agreement are violated by respondent No.4- mother.

¶41

It is further submitted that an application under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 has been filed as G & WC No.5007/2025 before the III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Anekal by respondent No.4.

¶42

Having considered the contentions advanced, we notice that the allegation in the writ petition itself is that the child is in the custody of respondent No.4, who is the mother.

¶43

In the above view of the matter, we are of the opinion that in case the writ petitioner has any grievance with regard to custody of the child, it is for the writ petitioner to

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:46001-DB WPHC No. 112 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

approach the appropriate Family Court and seek remedy under

¶47

the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. In case, any Guardians and Wards Act petition is already filed by respondent No.4, it is for the writ petitioner to appear in the said proceeding and take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

¶48

We therefore of the opinion that the writ petition (Habeas Corpus) would not be maintainable in the facts and circumstances of the case. The writ petition fails, same is accordingly, dismissed .

¶49

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

¶50

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶51

¶52

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1

Pradeepa Thear Madhavan @ Pradeepa T M v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeepa Thear Madhavan @ Pradeepa T M v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Vijaya Gopinath Vs Rajendra Savanur

Sri.Channabasavaiah Vs Sri. T. Sunil Kumar Dutt

Karnataka Industrial Vs Shivappa

Mr.S. Kiran Vs Sri.K.S. Shreyas

Dr.T.G Umesh Vs Sri. Sheik Latheef (Kas)

Smt N Revathi Vs Dr Sathish Govindaiah