Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2006
  6. /
  7. January

Master Arjun vs Smt. Shivani Chandra And Ors.

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 May, 2006

JUDGMENT / ORDER

JUDGMENT Rakesh Sharma, J.
1. This is a father's habeas corpus petition, seeking production of detenu, his child, Master Arjun petitioner who is being detained by his mother Smt. Shivani Chandra. Sri Prashant Chandra and Smt. Shivani Chandra got married on 15.2.2002 and thereafter Master Arjun was born out of their wedlock.
2. It emerges from record that due to some differences between the parties, Smt. Shivani Chandra is now living with her parents. Both the parties have raised personal allegations against each other in the petition and counter-affidavit indicating reasons for not living together. However, the dispute was raised before a competent court who is dealing with the application moved by the husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
3. The child Master Arjun aged about three years is presently living with her mother, Smt. Shivani Chandra at Panchkula, Haryana. Sri Prashant Chandra has submitted that he is natural guardian of Master Arjun and he can, provide him all the facilities such as education, maintenance etc. Mr. Prashant Chandra is an officer in the I.C.I.C.I. Bank and he is gaining sufficient salary to maintain the child. He has aged parents who are living at his residence in Indira Nagar, Lucknow. His parents can also take care of the child in bringing him up in life. The petitioner, on being asked by the Court whether he sent any gifts, birthday gifts, sweets, toys, etc., has placed a copy of F.D.R. for Rs. 10,000 the maturity value of which has been shown to be Rs. 13,635 on 21.8.2010. This amount was deposited for fixed term on 22.8.2005. In addition to this, Rs. 5,000 was also deposited on 22.5.2006 (i.e., one day before the date 23.5.2006 was fixed by the Court).
4. Sri Mridul Rakesh, learned Counsel for Ms. Shivani Chandra, respondent No. 1, by filing a counter-affidavit, has submitted that respondent No. 1 is a qualified Architect and is gainfully employed in a private construction firm at Panchkula, Haryana. She was maltreated by her husband and under compelling circumstances she had to leave her marital home to live with her parents at Panchkula Haryana. Master Arjun, child, has been admitted in a prestigious school. Euro Kids Panchkula Haryana. She has placed the fee receipts to demonstrate that she is taking good care of education and welfare of the child. Her parents are well educated, healthy and are able to take care of the child at home.
5. It has been alleged that Sri Prashant Chandra remains occupied in frequent tours and his job, service is transferable. Admittedly, his parents are suffering from cancer who may not be able to look after the child in the absence of Sri Prashant Chandra, father.
6. Heard Sri Shailesh Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mridul Rakesh appearing for the respondent No. 1 at length. Both the parties have put forth their versions before the Court. The child has been brought to the Court by his mother Smt. Shivani Chandra. He looks active, charming and healthy.
7. It is evident from the pleadings of the parties that the petitioner, Sri Prashant Chandra is an officer of the I.C.I.C.I. Bank. The job in financial Banks is such that it keeps its officer busy and occupied throughout the day. The petitioner's job is transferable in nature and he may be transferred from Lucknow to any other place in India. It has also been brought on record that the parents of Sri Prashant Chandra are suffering from cancer and may not be in a position to look after the growing child of two or three years' age who needs constant care and attention, education etc.
8. Smt. Shivani Chandra the wife of Sri Prashant Chandra is an Architect, who is generally occupied in the city. Of course sometime she visits the site for supervision and guidance. She is not in the job of construction and civil engineering. The parents of Smt. Shivani Chandra are admittedly healthy: they are well-educated and have retired from services. They can look after the child in the absence of his mother. It has been demonstrated before the Court that Master Arjun has been admitted in a SchoolEuro Kids at Panchkula. The fee receipts have been placed on record. The fee receipts Indicate that the institution is charging Rs. 1,200 per month, meaning thereby that three years' old growing child is being properly educated. The Court is satisfied with the pleadings of the parties that the child's education is being taken care of properly.
9. From the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that the mother, Smt. Shivani Chandra is taking proper care of the child. She f is residing at Panchkula, Haryana with her parents and they are there to look after the child when she is out of the home in furtherance of her professional work. The concern of the Court is welfare of the child as has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases in Sheila B. Das v. P.R. Sugasree and Shivaraj V. Patil v. D.M. . The welfare of the child is a paramount consideration and as such the mother is entitled to the custody of the child (vide ).
10. It is admitted between the parties that mother, Smt. Shivani Chandra has not remarried and is living with her parents at Panchkula, Haryana. The lady is financially stable and being mother she can take proper care of the minor child.
11. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and considering the versions of Sri Prashant Chandra and Smt. Shivani Chandra, who are present in the Court alongwith the child, Master Arjun who has also been brought to the Court, this Court is of the opinion that the Interest of 3 years child would be taken care of by the mother Smt. Shivani Chandra. Master Arjun is a growing child of about three years' age. No element of illegal detention is present in this case. The writ petition is dismissed.
12. At this stage Sri Shailesh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for Sri Prashant Chandra, has submitted that he may be given opportunity to meet his child. He has placed reliance on a Judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India as in Sheila B. Das v. P.R. Sugasree , in support of his request. Smt Shivani Chandra submits that she has no objection to this request. Sri Prashant Chandra, father of Master Arjun, upon prior intimation to Smt. Shivani Chandra, is permitted to visit and meet the child as and when he likes.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Master Arjun vs Smt. Shivani Chandra And Ors.

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 May, 2006
Judges
  • R Sharma