Smt. Ramya Anilshet @ Nagashree. R v. the State of Karnataka
Habeas corpus – enforcement of Family Court visitation order
Case brief
What is this about?
W.P.H.C. No.50 of 2026, High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, decided 8 June 2026 (NC: 2026:KHC:27159-DB). Mother sought writ of habeas corpus commanding respondent no.3 (father) to produce minor children Adithya Anil Shet and Aarav Anil Shet, invoking parens patriae jurisdiction and seeking handover of passports, birth certificates and academic records, on the ground that a Family Court visitation-rights order had not been complied with. Held: habeas corpus is not the proper remedy for enforcing a Family Court order; petitioner left free to pursue appropriate proceedings. Petition disposed of; I.A. No.1 of 2026 dismissed. Keywords: habeas corpus, custody of minors, visitation rights, Family Court order compliance, Articles 226 and 227, Karnataka.
What did the court decide?
A writ petition (habeas corpus) is not the proper remedy for securing compliance with an order of the Family Court; appropriate proceedings in accordance with law must instead be pursued before the appropriate forum.