Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

P&H HC Confirms Interim Custody of Minor Child to Present Caregivers, Decline to Biological Mother

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, 11th April 2023: In a significant ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court, in CRWP-822-2021 (O & M), has confirmed the interim custody of a minor child to the present caregivers, emphasizing the paramount consideration of the child's welfare. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, addressed allegations of abandonment and surrender of custody by the biological mother.

The factual background of the case involved the petitioner, Manisha Maheshwari, who is the biological mother of the minor child, Santosh, also known as Archit. The child had been in the custody of co-respondents No. 5 and 6, who assumed custody in May/June 2018. The petitioner had allegedly surrendered the child's custody to co-respondent No. 4 through a disputed document, Annexure R-4/1.

During the proceedings, the Court took into account the interactions with the minor child and the report of the Child Welfare Committee, Sirsa. These sources revealed that the child expressed his happiness and desire to stay with co-respondents No. 5 and 6, whom he considered as his parents. The Court emphasized the child's welfare and the best care provided by the present caregivers, as evidenced by medical records and the child's admission to a reputable school.

The petitioner's counsel relied on the judgment in Tejaswini Gaud v. Shekhar Jagdish Prasad Tewari (2019), arguing that the petitioner, as the biological mother, should be granted custody based on the child's best interests. However, the Court held that prima facie evidence suggested the petitioner's abandonment of the child and that the issue of custody should be determined by the civil court.

The Court further clarified that its decision confirmed the interim custody to the present caregivers until a final decision on custody is made by the Family Court. It cited previous judgments, including Manju Tiwari v. Dr. Rajendra Tiwari (1990) and Gippy Arora v. State of Punjab (2012), emphasizing the restoration of interim custody until the ultimate custody is determined by the appropriate authority.

The Court concluded by stating that its order should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case or binding on future court proceedings. It reasserted the paramount consideration of the child's welfare and the need for a comprehensive determination of custody by the competent authority.

D.D 11.04.2023

Manisha Maheshwari vs State of Haryana and others

Latest Legal News