Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2022) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16570 = 2022(1) L.A.R. 227
Decided on: 03.02.2022
Present:
Mr. Vikram Satpal Anand, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Bhupender Beniwal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
(Through Video Conferencing)
A. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (32 of 1956), Section 6 -- Custody of minor child – Criminal writ jurisdiction – Jurisdiction of civil court -- No evidence on record in respect of ill nourishment, and, ill upkeep of the minor boy, by his mother and by wife’s parents -- Under the statute, the mother of a minor child, less than seven years, is his/her natural guardian -- However, the statutory contemplation, does not override, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court concerned, to, while acting as parens patriae, to order for removal of the minor child, aged upto seven years, from the custody of his/her mother, to the custody of some more suitable, and, befitting person -- Petition held to be not maintainable, and, rather is gross mis-constituted -- However, leaving liberty to the petitioner, to, access the appropriate Civil Court concerned.
(Para 3-5)
B. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Meeting with minor child – Right of father – Criminal writ petition -- Since the petitioner is the father of the minor boy, and, is required to be accessing him to bless him, and may, be to provide financial assistance for his upkeep and maintenance -- Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to access his minor baby, who is residing alongwith his mother -- Accessing be ensured to be facilitated by the SHO of the police station concerned.
(Para 6)
***
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. (ORAL) –
1. A baby boy is born from a valid wedlock entered inter se, the petitioner with one, Gurpreet Kaur, who is arrayed as co-respondent No. 6 herein. Both, the minor boy, and, co-respondent No. 6, are residing at the parental home of co-respondent No. 6.
2. The petitioner, who is the husband of co-respondent No. 6, and, the father of minor boy, claims that proper care and protection be provided to his baby boy, and, also claims that he may be permitted to meet his newly born baby boy, as he alleges that co-respondents No. 4, 5 & 6 are preventing him to access his newly born boy.
3. Though, there is no evidence on record in respect of ill nourishment, and, ill upkeep of the minor boy, by his mother / correspondent No. 6, and, by the parents of co-respondent No. 6. If so, and, even otherwise, when under the relevant statute, inasmuch as under the Hindu Minority Guardianship Act, 1956, the mother of a minor child, less than seven years, is his / her natural guardian. However, the afore statutory contemplation, does not override, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court concerned, to, while acting as parens patriae, to order for removal of the minor child, aged upto seven years, from the custody of his/her mother, to the custody of some more suitable, and, befitting person.
4. Nonetheless, since as afore stated, there is no evidence in respect of ill care taking of the needs and necessities of the minor boy. Besides, when the remedy in respect of retrieval custody of the minor boy, from co-respondent No. 6 to the petitioner, i.e. the father, can become agitated not through the present petition, but can be agitated through his recoursing the appropriate civil remedy before the Civil Court concerned.
5. Therefore, the present petition is not maintainable, and, rather is gross mis-constituted. However, leaving liberty to the petitioner, to, access the appropriate Civil Court concerned.
6. Be that as it may, since the petitioner is the father of the minor boy, and, is required to be accessing him to bless him, and may, be to provide financial assistance for his upkeep and maintenance. Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to access his minor baby, who is residing alongwith his mother at the address mentioned against her name in the memo of parties of the instant petition.
7. The afore accessing be ensured to be facilitated by the SHO of the police station concerned, and, hence whensoever, the petitioner expresses his above desire, to, co-respondent No.3, the latter shall facilitate his accessing his minor boy, who is extantly residing with his mother, arrayed as co-respondent No. 6, at the address, as, mentioned in the memo of parties.
8. Disposed of accordingly.
Order accordingly.
********