Dismissed

V.Venkatesan v. Superintendent of Police

Madras HC27 Mar 2019HCP/539/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a habeas corpus petition by the biological father seeking custody of his children. The Court directed interim access to the paternal grandparents via a mediation centre, leaving the custody dispute to be decided in a pending civil proceeding.

What did the court decide?

Children directed to appear before Mediation Centre for petitioner's access; custody left to civil proceedings; habeas corpus petition dismissed.

V.Venkatesan Vs Superintendent of Police — Child Custody and Guardianship | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.03.2019 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR H.C.P.No.539/2019

V.Venkatesan

.. Petitioner

vs.

1.The Superintendent of Police Melmaruvathur, Kancheepuram District.

¶6

2.The Inspector of Police G3 Kancheepuram Police Station-L&O Melmaruvathur, Kancheepuram District. 3.V.Jayaraman .. Respondents

¶7

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus directing the 2^nd respondent herein to produce daughters of the petitioner [1]Keerthika-9 years [2]Hosika-4 years D/o.V.Venkatesan, from the custody of the 3^rd respondent bodily in person before this Court and hand over to the petitioner.

¶8

This Court, in continuation and in conjecture with the earlier order dated 13.03.2019, is passing the following order.

¶9

2 The petitioner is the biological father of two female children, namely, Keerthika and Hosika, who are aged about 9 and 4 years respectively, the detenues herein and according to him, his wife/mother of the detenues died on 05.11.2018 and cremation was done in the parental home and the detenues were taken for that purpose and however, they were refused to be returned to his custody.

¶10

3 When the matter is listed today, the maternal grandmother of the detenues, is present before this Court and

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

she would state that the elder child Keerthika, is unable to pursue her education for want of Transfer Certificate from the School in which she studied and the petitioner, being the father, is also refusing to give consent to get the Transfer Certificate. She would further state that both children are under her care and custody and they are being looked after well. Therefore, prays for appropriate direction, directing the petitioner to give no objection for getting Transfer Certificate from the earlier school, so as to enable her to admit Keerthika in a School at Melmaruvathur.

¶13

4 The petitioner is also present before us. He was also enquired. He would state that when his was alive, it was only he would made her to finish her Graduation and the children were taken to her parental home under the garb of performing the final ceremonies on the death of his wife and they have not been returned to him despite his very many requests and being the biological parent, he has also been denied access to see his children and hence, prays for appropriate orders.

¶14

5 The Court heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner ; learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents 1 and 2/State.

¶15

6 Admittedly, the 3^rd respondent has filed GWOP.No.41/2018 on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu, seeking permanent custody of the petitioner's children-detenues herein and in the light of the pendency of the proceedings before the appropriate and competent Forum, this Court is not inclined to express any opinion as to the alleged illegal custody or otherwise on the part of the 3^rd respondent. However, the petitioner being the biological father of the detenues, is entitled to see his children/detenues herein, at frequent intervals and the respective learned counsel appearing for them would undertake to do the needful and they also agree that both children can be produced before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to the District Court at Chengalpattu.

¶16

7 Hence, the detenues/minor children shall be produced before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to the District Court at Chengalpattu on the 1^st and 3^rd Saturdays of every month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m., till 03.06.2019 subject to Court Holidays so as to enable the petitioner to see his children and as regards the interim and permanent custody of the children, the petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedy in the pending proceeding in GWOP.No.41/2018 before the learned Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu. The Court of Principal District Judge, Chengalpattu, is also directed to

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

expedite the hearing of GWOP No.41/2018 and give an early disposal of the same.

¶19

8 The Habeas Corpus Petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
AP
To
1.The Superintendent of Police
Melmaruvathur, Kancheepuram District.
2.The Inspector of Police
G3 Kancheepuram Police Station-L&O
Melmaruvathur, Kancheepuram District.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
Madras High Court, Madras.
Copy to:-
1.The Principal District Judge
Chengalpattu.
2.The Mediation and Conciliation Centre
Principal District Court, Chengalpattu.
+1 cc to Mr.P.Gurunathan, Advocate, Sr.No. 29069
+1 cc to Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate, Sr.No. 28851
H.C.P.No.539/2019
CSL/10.05.2019

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

V.Venkatesan v. Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Venkatesan v. Superintendent of Police

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

Deepesh Makkatil @ Ranjith Vs the Secretary to the Government

K.Priya Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Khushruba Vs the Secretary to Government

N.Akbhar Vs the Commissioner of Police

K.Nagamani Vs the State Rep by

P.Abdul Hakim Vs Hariharan, IAS