Dismissed

Swati Soni Wife of Shri Noratan Soni D/O Late Shri Radheyshyam Ji Soni v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Aug 2023HC/254/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus petition, the High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the mother's prayer for custody of her six-year-old son, citing the child's expressed wish to reside with his father. The court directed the father to allow weekly meetings and video calls but transferred custody to him.

What did the court decide?

Habeas Corpus Petition dismissed; custody transferred to Respondent No.7; Petitioner allowed weekly meetings and bi-weekly video calls with the child.

Swati Soni Wife of Shri Noratan Soni D/O… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:18254-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 254/2023

¶4

Swati Soni Wife Of Shri Noratan Soni D/o Late Shri Radheyshyam Ji Soni, Aged About 41 Years, At Present Resident Of R-7, Inderpuri Colony, Behind Aditya Hospital, Lalkothi, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur

¶8

The Additional Director General Of Police, Anti Human Trafficking Unit, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶9

Director General Of Police, Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶11

Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur South, Jaipur

¶12

S.h.o., Police Station Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶13

Noratan Soni Son Of Shri Devi Shankar Soni, Aged About 44 Years, Resident Of Dhabaiyo Ka Chowk, Somaniyo Ki Gali, Bundi, District Bundi (Raj.)

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Madhu Sudan Sharma
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Ashwani Chobisa for respondent No.7
For State	: Mr. N.S. Gurjar, Assistant Govt. Advocate
	: Mr. Sardar Singh, ASI PS Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur(South)

¶16

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

¶17

Order

¶18

18/08/2023

¶19

Petitioner has preferred this habeas corpus petition seeking production of corpus.

¶20

[2023:RJ-JP:18254-DB]

¶21

[HC-254/2023]

¶22

(2 of 3)

¶23

It is mentioned in the petition that a male child was born on 24.10.2017 by IVF system, who was forcefully taken away by respondent No.7 on 16.07.2023.

¶24

On 10.08.2023, this Court interacted with the corpus. Corpus was directed to be deposited with Child Welfare Committee, Jaipur and it was directed to appoint a counselor to counsel the corpus. Both parties were directed to meet the corpus on alternate days.

¶25

Report has been received from Child Welfare Committee, Jaipur. It is revealed from the report that child is not having any psychiatric illness. Corpus has clearly desired to reside with his father. Corpus has constantly expressed his wish to reside with his father and has stated that he does not wish to stay with his mother.

¶26

Corpus has been produced before the Court. We have interacted with the corpus. Corpus has clearly stated that he wishes to stay with his father. Corpus is aged 6 years. Petitioner is presently working in a carpet factory, whereas respondent No.7 is a Chemical Engineer, who is presently out of job.

¶27

As per counsel for respondent No.7, they have filed an application for Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act.

¶28

Be that as it may, corpus is a child aged 6 years and wishes to stay with his father and presently, he does not appear in any form of threat, hence, we deem it proper to dismiss the habeas corpus petition.

¶29

Habeas Corpus Petition is accordingly, dismissed.

¶30

Custody of the corpus would continue with respondent No.7.

¶31

[2023:RJ-JP:18254-DB]

¶32

[HC-254/2023]

¶33

(3 of 3)

¶34

However, petitioner would be free to approach the Family Court, if so advised seeking custody of corpus. In case, the petitioner approaches the Family Court, the Family Court shall decide the matter without prejudice to the observations made by the Court.

¶35

During interaction corpus has stated that he would also wish to meet his mother. Respondent No.7 is directed to permit petitioner to meet the corpus on every Sundays and would also permit for video calling with the petitioner on every Saturdays.

¶36

A copy of this order be provided to learned Assistant Govt. Advocate for necessary compliance.

¶37

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶38

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶39

HEENA/01

Swati Soni Wife of Shri Noratan Soni D/O Late Shri Radheyshyam Ji Soni v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swati Soni Wife of Shri Noratan Soni D/O Late Shri Radheyshyam Ji Soni v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vakeel Son of Pappu @ Islam Vs State of Rajasthan

Pawan Nagar S/O Shri Kanhiya Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramjani Mohammed S/O Shri Ikaramuddin Vs the State of Rajasthan

Pintu Kumar S/O Shri Bhanwar Lal Dhanka Vs State of Rajasthan

Ganesh Bairwa Son of Late Shri Rameshwar, Vs State of Rajasthan

Babu Lal S/O Shri Chhotu Ram Vs State of Rajasthan