IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH WRIT PETITION (HC) NO.85 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
SRI RAVI C SON OF CHIKKAMALAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS NO.23, 4TH MAIN ROAD LAKSHMIDEVAMMA BLOCK GANGANAGAR, BEHIND BINNY MILL R.T. NAGAR BENGALURU NORTH-560 032.
(BY SRI:ABHAY ANAND J., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI SHIVA BEERAIAH AGED MAJOR KODAMBAHALLI VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA-562 138.
... PETITIONER 2. SMT. NAGARATHNAMMA WIFE OF SHIVA BEERAIAH AGED MAJOR KODAMBAHALLI VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT RAMANAGARA-562 138.
3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER AKKUR POLICE STATION KODAMBAHALLI VILLAGE CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA-562 138.
4. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE NO.2, ALI ASKER ROAD INFANTRY ROAD BENGALURU-560 051.
5. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME ROOM NO.219, 2ND FLOOR VIDHANA SOUDHA DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
(BY SRI:S.V. GIRIKUMAR, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE) ... RESPONDENTS THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE APPROPRIATE ORDERS OR DIRECTIONS, BY ISSUING THE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF HABEAS CORPUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 TO CAUSE THE PRODUCTION OF THE DETENUE, BY THE NAME OF MS. YOGITHA, AGED 7 YEARS, BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT, AND HAND OVER THE CHILD TO THE RIGHTFUL CUSTODY OF THE PETITIONER.
***** THIS WPHC COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition is filed seeking for a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to produce the minor child of the petitioner, aged about 7 years who is said to be in illegal custody of respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. The petitioner is the father. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are his in-laws. That the wife of the petitioner died on 15.01.2018. After the death of his wife, the child is in custody of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Even though the petitioner requested them to hand over the child, they have refused to do so. Hence, this petition.
3. On hearing learned Counsels, we do not find any grounds to proceed further. This is a matter of custody. Whether the custody is legal or illegal is a matter to be decided by the appropriate Court. We do not think that the Habeas Corpus would lie in the given facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, the petitioner is always at liberty to move the jurisdictional Family Court to seek appropriate relief. Hence, we find no good grounds to proceed further.
The petition is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE *bgn/-