MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Custody with Father Not Illegal Confinement: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir Sets Aside Magistrate's Order for Minor Child's Production

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, has overturned a Judicial Magistrate 1st Class's order for a search-cum-production warrant of a minor child under Section 97 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) in a matrimonial dispute case (CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS (M) No. 240 of 2022).

The Court examined the challenge to the order issued by the lower court, focusing on the legal framework provided by Section 97 of Cr.P.C. This provision allows a Magistrate to issue search warrants in cases where a person's confinement amounts to an offense. The Court emphasized that for such a warrant to be issued, the confinement must constitute an offense.

The petitioner, Showkat Ahmad Mir, represented by Mr. Naveed Gul, Advocate, contested the search warrant issued for his minor son, who was in his custody. The respondent, Nighat Begum, represented by Mr. Rizwan-ul-Zaman, Advocate, alleged neglect and sought the child’s welfare under her care. The case revolved around the interpretation of 'wrongful confinement' in the context of custody of a minor child.

Justice Dhar, in his assessment, referred to the precedent "Shameem Ahmad vs. Ashiya Begum, 2016 (3) JKJ 128" and "Ramesh vs. Laxmi Bai, (1998) 9 SCC 266," stressing that the custody of a minor child with their father, in the absence of evidence of illegal confinement amounting to an offense, does not justify the issuance of a search warrant under Section 97 Cr.P.C. The Court underscored the paramount importance of the child’s welfare in custody matters but clarified that such issues are to be addressed under the Guardians and Wards Act for permanent custody determination.

The High Court held that the lower court's order was unsustainable in law, as the custody of the child by the father did not constitute illegal confinement amounting to an offense. The Court set aside the order for the child’s production, allowing the petition and emphasized that parties could approach the competent court under the Guardians and Wards Act for matters concerning permanent custody.

Date of Decision: February 12, 2024

Showkat Ahmad Mir vs. Nighat Begum

Latest Legal News