Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Paramjit Kaur, filed a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru, seeking the production of her daughter, Mrs. Sandeep Kaur, from the alleged illegal custody of respondents 4 and 5 (Mr. Manprit Singh Gill and Mrs. Balbir Kaur, the in-laws). The petition was heard by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Nataraj Rangaswamy. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel informed the court that, pursuant to an earlier order, the daughter had come to Bengaluru along with one child and was staying with the petitioner. The other child had opted to stay with respondent 4. In light of this development, the court observed that nothing survived in the habeas corpus petition. The court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to adopt appropriate proceedings in accordance with law if she had any other grievance. The judgment was delivered on 3 July 2020 via video conferencing.
Headnote
A) Habeas Corpus - Custody of Major - Voluntary Return - The petitioner mother sought production of her major daughter from the custody of respondents 4 and 5 (in-laws). The court noted that the daughter had voluntarily returned to the petitioner with one child, while the other child opted to stay with respondent 4. Held that nothing survives in the habeas corpus petition, which was disposed of as infructuous. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of habeas corpus should be issued for production of a major daughter allegedly in illegal custody of in-laws.
Final Decision
The petition was disposed of as nothing survived in the habeas corpus petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to adopt appropriate proceedings in accordance with law for any other grievance.
Law Points
- Habeas corpus
- custody of major
- voluntary return
- disposal as infructuous
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (07) 146
Writ Petition (HC) No.39 of 2020
Abhay S. Oka, Chief Justice, Nataraj Rangaswamy, Justice
Smt. Rajitha T.O. for petitioner; Sri. V.S. Hegde, SPP-II for respondents 1-3; Smt/Sri. Baby Balan for respondents 4-5
State of Karnataka, Director General and Inspector General of Police, Station House Officer, Mr. Manprit Singh Gill, Mrs. Balbir Kaur
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ of habeas corpus for production of a major daughter allegedly in illegal custody of in-laws.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of habeas corpus directing respondents 2 and 3 to produce her daughter Mrs. Sandeep Kaur from the custody of respondents 4 and 5.
Filing Reason
Petitioner alleged that her daughter was in illegal custody of her in-laws (respondents 4 and 5).
Previous Decisions
An earlier order of the court had resulted in the daughter coming to Bengaluru with one child and staying with the petitioner.
Issues
Whether the daughter was in illegal custody warranting a writ of habeas corpus.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel stated that the daughter had returned to the petitioner with one child, and the other child opted to stay with respondent 4.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ of habeas corpus becomes infructuous when the alleged detenu voluntarily returns to the custody of the petitioner, and no further relief is required.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that as per the earlier order passed by this Court, the petitioner’s daughter Mrs.Sandeep Kaur has come to Bengaluru along with one child and is staying with the petitioner.
In view of this position, nothing survives in this petition for habeas corpus.
Procedural History
The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. An earlier order was passed by the court. On 3 July 2020, the matter came up for further hearing via video conferencing, and the court disposed of the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
