IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(Crl.).No. 283 of 2010(S)
1. REJITH, AGED 31 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
6. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
7. SEEMA, AGED 35 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.C.N.SAMEER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :14/07/2010
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
W.P.(Crl) No.283 of 2010
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of July 2010
J U D G M E N T
Basant,J
The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for
issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce
his 2 = year old male child Nijith. The petitioner’s case is that
he had a relationship with the 7th respondent. The 7th
respondent was married once and divorced. Later, she had a
relationship with another person. She terminated that
relationship and thereafter she had a relationship with the
petitioner. In the relationship between the petitioner and the 7th
respondent, a minor male child, Nijith was born. After the birth
of the child, the petitioner and the 7th respondent allegedly lived
together for six months and thereafter the 7th respondent went
away leaving the child with the petitioner. The child was thus in
the custody of the petitioner for two years thereafter. The child
is now aged 2 = years. It is the grievance of the petitioner that
the 7th respondent has forcibly taken the child away from the
W.P.(Crl) No.283/10 : 2 :
petitioner using force and with the support of police officials.
The petitioner describes the custody of the 2 = year old
illegitimate child born in the relationship between the petitioner
and the 7th respondent (the mother of the child) to be unjustified
and secured by the use of force with the assistance of the police.
Such forcible taking away of the child took place on 08/07/2010,
complains the petitioner. The petitioner, in these circumstances,
has come to this Court with this petition.
2. The dispute basically is one between the father and
mother of a 2 = year old male child. The child, admittedly, is not
born in a legal matrimony. The claimed status of the child is that
of an illegitimate child. Even if we accept all the submissions
made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
averments made in the petition, there is no escape from the fact
that the dispute essentially and in its core is one between the
father and mother for the custody of a 2 = year old illegitimate
male child. The custody of the 7th respondent/mother of the child
can, by no stretch of imagination, be described to be unlawful,
illegal or amounting to detention or confinement. We are
satisfied that there is absolutely no reason to invoke the
W.P.(Crl) No.283/10 : 3 :
extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India to issue a writ of habeas corpus.
3. We are convinced that this is a fit case where the
petitioner must approach the Family Court for custody of the
minor child, if he is of the opinion that he has a valid case to
secure custody of the child.
4. With the above observations, this writ petition is
dismissed. We make it clear that we have not intended to
express any opinion as to who of the two – father or mother is
entitled to custody of the admittedly illegitimate child.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy// PA to Judge
W.P.(Crl) No.283/10 : 4 :
W.P.(Crl) No.283/10 : 5 :
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
.No. of 200
ORDER/JUDGMENT
29/07/2009