Dismissed

Mandeep Kaur v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Jan 2011CRWP/179/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the illegal detention of minor children by the father. The single-judge bench dismissed the petition, holding that custody with the father was not illegal absent a Section 125 Cr.P.C. application or divorce petition, advising the petitioner to approach the court for custody under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956.

What did the court decide?

Crl. Writ Petition No.179 of 2011 dismissed as having no merits and not being the efficacious remedy; petitioner advised to file petition under Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956.

Mandeep Kaur Vs State of Punjab and… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

Crl. Writ Petition No.179 of 2011

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Writ Petition No.179 of 2011 Date of Decision: 21.01.2011

Mandeep Kaur

..... Petitioner.

Versus

State of Punjab and others.

¶9

.....Respondents.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH

¶11

Present: Mr. Premjit Kalia, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

¶13

JORA SINGH, J (ORAL)

¶14

This petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus for the release of minor children of the petitioner, namely Puneetjit Singh (son), aged 9 years and Gurleen Kaur (daughter), aged 8 years, from the illegal detention of respondent No.4-Sarabjit Singh, husband of the petitioner.

¶15

Allegation in the petition is that the petitioner was married with respondent No.4 on 15.11.2000 as per Sikh Rites and Ceremonies and out of this wedlock two children, namely Puneetjit Singh (son) aged 9 years and Gurleen Kaur (daughter), aged 8 years were born out, who are in illegal custody of respondent-4. Dispute amongst the petitioner and respondent No.4 is a matrimonial dispute.

¶16

After going through the petition, I am of the opinion that custody of minor children with their father is not illegal. No application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was preferred by the petitioner and no divorce petition is pending.

¶17

Detenues are school going children and are being taken to school by their father. In case detenues are directed to appear in Court

¶18

Crl. Writ Petition No.179 of 2011

¶19

- 2 -

¶20

then they cannot be sent forcibly with the petitioner. Only after evidence court is to opine as to whether welfare of the children would be better while in the custody of the petitioner or their father. When evidence is required to settle the controversy particularly when the children are with their father then custody of the children with their father cannot be considered as illegal. Efficacious remedy with the petitioner is to file petition under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956.

¶21

In view of all discussed above, instant petition without merits

¶22

is dismissed.

¶23

JANUARY 21, 2011 sham

¶24

(JORA SINGH) JUDGE

Mandeep Kaur v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandeep Kaur v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Karamjit Kaur Vs the State of Punjab

Raju Alias Raj Pal Vs the State of Haryana

Dheer Singh Vs Raju Alias Raj Pal

Darshan Singh Vs S.S.P. Patiala & Ors.

Uttam Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

(O&M) Tarsem Vs Raj Kumar Gupta & Ors.