Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Delhi High Court Upholds Mother's Interim Custody of Abducted Child Warned Against Fleeing

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court issued a significant ruling in a habeas corpus case, upholding the interim custody of a minor child who had been abducted by the father. The case involved a Ukrainian mother, Ms. Gupta Snizhana Grygorivna, who sought the custody of her three-year-old son, Master Gupta Sameer Akhileshovych. The judgment, delivered on October 20, 2023, by the bench of HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR, emphasized the importance of preserving the child's well-being and preventing any further unauthorized movement.

The court's observation highlighted the gravity of the situation, stating, "The child of the parties was born on 12.02.2019 in Ukraine. Respondent no.5/father had abducted the child in gross violation of court orders and crossed international borders. This led to the filing of the present habeas corpus petition by the petitioner."

The judgment granted interim custody of the child to the mother, with specific conditions, and also addressed the issue of visitation rights sought by the father. Respondent no.5/husband had expressed concerns that the petitioner, being a Ukrainian citizen, might attempt to leave the country with the child. In response, the court granted liberty to the respondents to approach the appropriate forum within three weeks if needed, while directing the petitioner not to leave the country for at least three weeks.

The court's decision underlined the primary focus on the child's welfare and the need to adhere to court orders. It stated, "The relief sought in the present petition has already been granted, and no further orders are required. The issue of interim custody or visitation rights in respect of the minor child is to be dealt with by the learned Family Court."

This judgment serves as a reminder of the courts' commitment to safeguarding the rights and interests of minor children caught in complex legal disputes involving custody and visitation.

 Date of Decision: October 20, 2023

MS GUPTA SNIZHANA GRYGORIVNA  vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20-Oct-2023-Ms-Gupta-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News