English Typing Test

AFR CourtNo.-84 Case:-HABEASCORPUSWRITPETITIONNo.-1057of2019 Petitioner:-AwanishPandeyAndAnother Respondent:-StateOfU.P.And3Others CounselforPetitioner:-SanjayManiTripathi,AdeelAhmadKhan,Na CounselforRespondent:-G.A.,AnupamaTripathi,RakeshKumarTripathi Hon'bleDr.YogendraKumarSrivastava,J. 1.HeardSriAnilKumarSrivastava,learnedSeniorCounselassistedbySriPremNarainSingh,learnedcounselforthepetitionersandSriArvindKumar,learnedAdditionalGovernmentAdvocateappearingfortheState-respondents.Noonehasappearedfortherespondentno.4,thoughthenamesofcounselareshowninthelist. 2.Thepresentpetitionforawritofhabeascorpushasbeenfiledseekingcustodyofthepetitionern.2,corpus,statedtobeaminorofageaboutfiveyearsandtenmonths,bythepetitionerno.1whoassertstobehisfather. 3.Thefactsasstatedinthewritpetitionindicatethatthepetitionerno.2wasborninthemonthofJanuary,2014andon11.05.2015,thewifeofthepetitionerno.1i.e.themotherofthecorpus,isstatedtohavecommittedsuicideatthepetitioner'shomeandthereafteranFIRwaslodgedagainstthepetitionerno.1andotherfamilymembers,registeredasCaseCrimeNo.149of2015underSection498-A,304-BIPCand3/4D.P.Act,PoliceStationBahariya,DistrictPrayagrajandthepetitionerno.1wassenttojailon17.05.2015. 4.Ithasfurtherbeenstatedthattherespondentno.4filedaHabeasCorpusWritPetitionNo.45207of2015(OmPrakashMishraandanotherVs.StateofU.P.andothers)andthisCourt,upontakingnoticeofthefactthatthefatherofthecorpusandotherfamilymemberswereinjail,passedanorderdated22.09.2015grantingcustodyoftheminorchildtothematernalgrand-father,whoistherespondentno.4inthepresentcase.Thehabeascorpuspetitionwassubsequentlydismissedasinfructuousintermsofanorderdated28.11.2016. 5.Pleadingshavebeenexchanged. 6.LearnedAdditionalGovernmentAdvocatehaspointedoutthatacopyoftheFirstInformationReport,whichhasbeenfiledasannexure1tothewritpetition,indicatesthatthesamewaslodgedon12.05.2015underSections498-A,304-BIPCandSection3/4oftheDowryProhibitionAct,1961.InthesaidFirstInformationReport,thepetitionerno.1herein,isnamedasoneoftheaccused.ItissubmittedthattheFirstInformationReportisinrespectofanincidentrelatingtothedeathofthewifeofthepetitionerno.1i.e.motherofthecorpus,whosecustodyisbeingsought. 7.LearnedAdditionalGovernmentAdvocatesubmitsthatpetitionerno.1beingtheprincipalaccusedinthependingcriminalcase,theprayerofthepetitionerno.1seekingcustodyoftheminorchildmaybedetrimentaltohisinterest. 8.Insomewhatsimilarsetoffacts,inthecaseofNilRatanKunduandanothervs.AbhijitKundu1,wherethecustodyofaminorwassoughtinthebackgroundofthependencyofacriminalcaseunderSections498and304I.P.C.againstthefathercharginghimofcausingthedeathofaminor'smother,itwasheldthattheparamountconsiderationinsuchmatterswouldbethewelfareofthechild,andthecourt,exercising'parenspatriae'jurisdiction,mustgivedueweightagetoachild'sordinarycomfort,contentment,health,education,intellectualdevelopmentandfavourablesurroundingsaswellasphysicalcomfortandmoralvaluesandthecharacteroftheproposedguardianisalsorequiredtobeconsidered.Itwasheldthatthependencyofacriminalcase,whereinthefatherhasbeenchargedofcausingthedeathoftheminor'smother,wasarelevantfactorrequiredtobeconsideredbeforeanappropriateordercouldbepassed.Itwasheldasfollows:- "52.Inourjudgment,thelawrelatingtocustodyofachildisfairlywellsettledanditisthis:indecidingadifficultandcomplexquestionastothecustodyofaminor,acourtoflawshouldkeepinmindrelevantstatutesandtherightsflowingtherefrom.Butsuchcasescannotbedecidedsolelybyinterpretinglegalprovisions.Itisahumanproblemandisrequiredtobesolvedwithhumantouch.Acourtwhiledealingwithcustodycases,isneitherboundbystatutesnorbystrictrulesofevidenceorprocedurenorbyprecedents.Inselectingproperguardianofaminor,theparamountconsiderationshouldbethewelfareandwell-beingofthechild.Inselectingaguardian,thecourtisexercisingparenspatriaejurisdictionandisexpected,naybound,togivedueweighttoachild'sordinarycomfort,contentment,health,education,intellectualdevelopmentandfavourablesurroundings.Butoverandabovephysicalcomforts,moralandethicalvaluescannotbeignored.Theyareequally,orwemaysay,evenmoreimportant,essentialandindispensableconsiderations... xxx 63.Inourconsideredopinion,onthefactsandinthecircumstancesofthecase,boththecourtswereduty-boundtoconsidertheallegationsagainsttherespondenthereinandpendencyofcriminalcaseforanoffencepunishableunderSection498-AIPC.Oneofthematterswhichisrequiredtobeconsideredbyacourtoflawisthe"character"oftheproposedguardian.InKirtikumar,thisCourt,almostinsimilarcircumstanceswherethefatherwasfacingthechargeunderSection498-AIPC,didnotgrantcustodyoftwominorchildrentothefatherandallowedthemtoremainwithmaternaluncle. 64.Thus,acomplaintagainstthefatherallegingandattributingthedeathofmother,andacaseunderSection498-AIPCisindeedarelevantfactorandacourtoflawmustaddressthesaidcircumstancewhiledecidingthecustodyoftheminorinfavourofsuchaperson." 9.InanearlierdecisioninthecaseofKirtikumarMaheshankarJoshivs.PradipkumarKarunashankerJoshi2,whereinalmostsimilarcircumstancesthefatherwasfacingachargeunderSection498-AI.P.C.,itwasheldthatthoughthefatherbeinganaturalguardian,hasapreferentialrighttothecustodyofthechildren,butinthefactsandcircumstancesofthecase,itwouldnotbeintheinterestofchildrentohandovertheircustodytothefather. 10.InarecentdecisioninRachitPandey(minor)andanothervs.StateofU.P.and3others3thisCourtafterreferringtotheauthoritativepronouncementsinthecaseofNithyaAnandRaghvanvs.State(NCTofDelhi)andanother4,SayedSaleemuddinvs.Dr.Rukhsanaandothers5andTejaswiniGaudandothersvs.ShekharJagdishPrasadTewariandothers6,hasheldthatinanapplicationseekingawritofhabeascorpusforcustodyofaminorchild,theprincipalconsiderationfortheCourtwouldbetoascertainwhetherthecustodyofthechildcanbesaidtobeunlawfulandillegalandwhetherthewelfareofthechildrequiresthatthepresentcustodyshouldbechangedandthechildshouldbehandedoverinthecareandcustodyofsomeoneelseotherthaninwhosecustodythechildpresentlyis.Itwasheldthatthepregorativewritofhabeascorpus,isinthenatureofextraordinaryremedy,whichmaynotbeusedtoexaminethequestionofcustodyofachildexceptwhereinthecircumstancesofaparticularcase,itcanbeheldthatthecustodyoftheminorisillegalorunlawful. 11.LearnedSeniorCounselappearingforthepetitionershasnotbeenabletopointoutastohow,inthefactsandcircumstancesofthepresentcase,thecustodyofthepetitionerno.2withhismaternalgrand-fathercanbesaidtobeillegalorunlawfulsoastopursuadethisCourttoexerciseitsextraordinaryprerogativejurisdictionforissuingawritofhabeascorpus.Hehasalsonotdisputedthatanyrightswithregardtoguardianshiporcustodyaretobeagitatedbeforetheappropriateforum. 12.Thehabeascorpuspetitionstandsdismissedaccordingly. Order
0:00