Allowed

Bilkis Bano Wife of Firoz Khan v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC4 Sept 2023HC/270/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a D.B. habeas corpus petition, the High Court of Rajasthan ordered the immediate release of an adopted daughter to her adoptive mother, relying on the validity of the registered adoption deed and pending dismissal of a suit challenging it.

What did the court decide?

Custody of the adopted child was handed over to the petitioner in the Court of Records.

Bilkis Bano Wife of Firoz Khan Vs the State… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:20672-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Habeas Corpus Petition No. 270/2023

¶4

Bilkis Bano Wife Of Firoz Khan, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of 35, Brihad Society, Udhyan, District Surat, Gujarat - 394210, At Present Resident Of Mohalla Nagoriyan, Ward No. 17, Town Chaksu, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶8

The Additional Director General Of Police, Anti Human Trafficking Unit, Jaipur.

¶9

The Station House Officer, Police Station Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶10

Shabbir Mohammad Son Of Abdul Ajiz, Resident Of Mohalla Nagoriyan, Ward No. 17, Town Chaksu, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶11

Reshma Begum Wife Of Shabbir Mohammad, Resident Of Mohalla Nagoriyan, Ward No. 17, Town Chaksu, Tehsil Chaksu, District Jaipur (Raj.).

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s)	:	Mr. Prahlad Sharma, Adv.
For State	:	Mr. Javed Choudhary, Addl. GA Mr. Yogesh Goyal, IPS, DCP (South), Jaipur
		Mr. Kailashdan, SHO,Police Station Chaksu Ms. Ramghani, MFC No.3798
For Respondent No.4	:	Mr. Narendra Mohan and Mr. Ankur
& 5		Srivastava

¶14

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

¶15

Order

¶16

04/09/2023

¶17

Vide order dated 02.09.2023, DCP (South) was directed to be personally present before the Court.

¶18

[2023:RJ-JP:20672-DB]

¶19

[HC-270/2023]

¶20

(2 of 3)

¶21

Mr. Yogesh Goyal, IPS, DCP (South), Jaipur is present before the Court.

¶22

Petitioner has preferred this habeas corpus petition seeking custody of the corpus- her adopted daughter. 4. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the corpus was taken in adoption when she was two years old. A registered adoption deed was executed between the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 & 5. It is also contended that since adoption, corpus had been staying with petitioner, but when petitioner visited her parental home, the corpus was forcefully retained by respondent Nos.4 & 5, for which an FIR was also lodged on 17.07.2023.

¶23

It is also contended that after lodging of the FIR, respondent Nos.4 & 5 appeared before the police and submitted a compromise, wherein they have mentioned that the corpus would be handed over to the petitioner within ten days. It was specifically mentioned in the compromise that the corpus would be handed over on 22.07.2023. It is further contended that thereafter, when the corpus was not handed over, petitioner approached the Court by filing the present habeas corpus petition. It is also contended that respondent Nos.4 & 5 have filed a civil suit for custody of the child, which was dismissed.

¶24

Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4 & 5 have opposed the petition. It is contended that under the Mohammadan Law, there is no provision for adoption. The civil suit was not dismissed on merits, but it was dismissed for non-compliance under Section 80 CPC. It is also contended that the corpus is not being properly looked after by the petitioner and they have no

¶25

(3 of 3)

¶26

[2023:RJ-JP:20672-DB]

¶27

[HC-270/2023]

¶28

objection to the corpus being given to the petitioner, if the corpus is properly looked after.

¶29

We have considered the contentions.

¶30

Since petitioner has adopted the corpus by a registered adoption deed which has not been set aside by any Court and the civil suit for cancellation of adoption deed also stands dismissed, and the corpus has been with the petitioner for last four years, we deem it proper to allow the habeas corpus petition.

¶31

Habeas corpus petition is accordingly, allowed. Custody of the corpus is handed over to the petitioner today in the Court. 10. Any order passed herein will not have any effect on any suit or proceedings with regard to the cancellation of adoption deed.

¶32

A copy of this order be provided to learned Addl. GA for compliance.

¶33

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶34

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶35

CHANDAN /239

Bilkis Bano Wife of Firoz Khan v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilkis Bano Wife of Firoz Khan v. the 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

Harimohan Son of Shri Ramras Vs State of Rajasthan

Dheeraj Son of Shri Raghunath Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Sapita Devi W/O Shri Dharm Singh Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Priti Chauhan D/O Shri Samant Singh W/O Shir Anil Singh Rathore Vs Union of India through the Secretary

Gramsevak S/O Shri Badrilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Tipu @ Teepu Sultan @ Aabid Ali S/O Sh. Akil Mohammed @ Akil Khan Vs State of Rajasthan