Sri. Narasimhan R Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Sri. Narasimhan R Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted. The Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) was closed without prejudice to the contentions of the parties and their rights to approach the appropriate Court; all contentions of both sides were left open.

Issue for consideration

Whether the alleged detenue, a one-year-old child stated to have been born by surrogacy, was in the illegal custody of respondent No.9 so as to justify a writ of habeas corpus directing her to produce the child and hand over custody to the petitioner. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the issues are with regard to custody of a minor between parties to a marriage (with a Guardian and Wards case pending before the Family Court, Bengaluru), there is no illegal detention involved justifying the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.

Key takeaways

Accordingly, the Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) is closed without prejudice to the contentions of the parties and their rights to approach the appropriate Court for redressal of their grievance; all contentions of both sides are left open.ratio¶54

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Habeas corpus — custody of infant child between spouses. Petitioner (father) sought a writ of habeas corpus under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for production of his one-year-old daughter (stated by him to have been born by surrogacy) alleging she had been illegally taken by her mother, respondent No.9, and for custody until disposal of G&WC Petition No. 425/2025. A Guardian and Wards case was already pending before the Family Court, Bengaluru, and counsel stated that a matrimonial case was also pending between the parties. HELD (per Anu Sivaraman J; bench included Tara Vitasta Ganju J): since the issue involved was custody of a minor between parties to a marriage, there was no illegal detention justifying issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. The Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) was closed without prejudice to the parties' contentions and their right to approach the appropriate Court; all contentions were left open.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14467-DB WPHC No. 12 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

WPHC NO.12 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

SRI. NARASIMHAN R S/O RAGHAVACHAR N AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.304, 3^RD FLOOR, HEXAGON AYI APARTMENT 6^TH MAIN, BALAJI NAGAR ITI LAYOUT, KATRHIGUPPE HOSAKERE HALLI BENGALURU - 560 085

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. GIRISH PATEL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. TRIVIKRAM S S., ADVOCATE)

Digitally signed by SUMATHY KANNAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, ROOM NO.320, 3^RD FLOOR VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001

DIRECTOR-GENERAL & INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, NO.2 NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:14467-DB WPHC No. 12 of 2026

HC-KAR

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD OPPOSITE COFFEE BOARD BENGALURU - 560 001

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU SOUTH SOUTH END CIRCLE BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU - 560 004

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU SOUTH SOUTH END CIRCLE BASAVANAGUDI

BENGALURU - 560 004

STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHENNAMMANAKERE ACHUKATTU POLICE STATION BENGALURU - 560 001

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE MIRZA ROAD NEAR GANDHIVANA PARK, NAZARBAD LOKARANJAN MAHAL ROAD, MYSURU, KARNATAKA – 570 010

STATION HOUSE OFFICER VIDYARANYAPURAM POLICE STATION J P NAGARA MAIN ROAD, J P NAGARA MYSURU - 570 008

SMT. DIVYA V W/O NARASIMHAN R AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO.1036, 18/D 3^RD MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, S.J.H.S ROAD VIDYARANYAPURAM MYSORE – 570 008

…RESPONDENTS

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14467-DB WPHC No. 12 of 2026

HC-KAR

(BY SRI. B.A.BELLIAPPA., SPP-I A/W SRI. P.THEJESH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R8; SRI. ANJAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R9)

DETENUE

BABY SAMHITA N ACHAR, D/O NARASIMHAN R, AGED ABOUT 1 YEAR 1 MONTH 3^RD MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, S.J.H.S ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURAM, MYSORE – 570 008

THIS WP(HC) IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF THE DETINUE BABY SAMHITA N ACHAR, D/O NARASIMHAN R FROM THE ILLEGAL DETENTION AT THE HANDS OF THE RESPONDENT NO.9 AND HAND OVER THE CUSTODY TO THE PETITIONER TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE G&WC PETITION NO.425/2025 AND ETC

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

ORAL JUDGMENT

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

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents No.1 to 8.

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:14467-DB WPHC No. 12 of 2026

HC-KAR

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the alleged detenue, a one year old child, was born by surrogacy and that his wife - respondent No.9 has illegally taken the child from the lawful custody of the petitioner. It is contended that a writ of Habeas Corpus is to be issued directing respondent No.9 to produce the alleged detenue before this Court.

Having considered the contentions advanced, we

notice that the issue involved in this writ petition is with regard to the custody of a minor between parties to a marriage. It is also clear that the respondent No.9 has filed a Guardian and Wards case before the Family Court, Bengaluru, which is pending. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner that a matrimonial case is also pending between the parties. In

any view of the matter, we are of the opinion that since the issues are with regard to custody of a minor, there is no illegal detention involved justifying the issuance of writ

of habeas corpus.

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:14467-DB WPHC No. 12 of 2026

HC-KAR

Accordingly, the Writ Petition (Habeas Corpus) is

closed without prejudice to the contentions of the parties and their rights to approach the appropriate Court for redressal of their grievance.

All contentions of both sides are left open.

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN)

JUDGE

Sd/(TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE

YKL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4