Kirandeep Kaur v. State Of Punjab And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 27.05.2025 Kirandeep Kaur

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH ****

Present:

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bakolia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasdeep Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab.

Mr. Aditya Dassaur, Advocate, for respondent No.4 .

***** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, for releasing the minor detenue namely Harsh Verma, aged six months (now about 11 months) from the illegal custody and detention of respondent No.4.

2.

On 14.05.2025, the following order was passed in the instant petition:- "1.

The petitioner seeks writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus so as to seek release of her minor son Harsh Verma aged about 06 months who is stated to have been forcibly taken away by respondent No.4, who is none else but her husband.

 Petitioner-Kirandeep Kaur and respondent No.4-Rohit Verma both are present before the Court today.

3.

Despite making all efforts even by the Court, respondent No.2 is not agreeing to hand over the custody of the minor child, who is now aged about 11 months. 4.

Since there is no dispute regarding the parentage of the child, who is now aged about 11 months and the fact disclosed by the petitioner herself before this Court that apart from her, in the family her parents and her sisters are also residing with her, the fear or apprehension as expressed by respondent No. 4 that there may be some harm to the child; appears to be without any substance.

5.

Therefore, it is directed that either respondent No.4 would hand over the custody of the child to the petitioner within 10 days from today, at the address of the petitioner or the child would be produced before this Court by respondent No.4 on the next date of hearing.

6.

List again on 27.05.2025.

7.

To be taken up at 2:00 PM."

3.

It is jointly informed by learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.4 that the child who was earlier in the custody of respondent No.4 has now been handed over to the petitioner and as such the said child is presently staying with the petitioner. 4.

The Court appreciates the conduct of respondent No.4 as he himself has handed over the custody of the child without compelling the Court to issue any other unpleasant directions.

5.

Additionally, it is observed that respondent No.4 is the father of the minor child, who is of the age of about 11 months and the child would not be stopped for having atleast two hours meeting on every Saturday and Sunday with the father.

6.

If any kind of obstruction is caused by the petitioner or by any of her family members in allowing the meeting of father with the minor son, it would be open for the respondent No.4 to move an appropriate application in the instant petition for issuance of appropriate directions by recalling the order or if any statutory custody petition is filed before any Court, such application can be moved there also.

7.

In view of the aforementioned terms, the present petition is disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE May 27, 2025 archana Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No