Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

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