CRWP-743-2019 -1-
265
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP-743-2019
Date of decision-04.12.2019
Priya Bhatti …Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and others …Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ
Present: Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ramdeep Partap Singh, DAG, Punjab.
***
MANOJ BAJAJ, J. (Oral)
Priya Bhatti-Petitioner has filed this criminal writ petition
praying for issuance of writ in the nature of habeas corpus for custody of her
child, namely, Lakshya son of Tirath Singh Bhatti (detenu) who is allegedly
in illegal custody of respondent Nos.4 and 5 (grand-parents of the detenu).
Notice of motion was issued in this petition on 28.08.2019.
Pursuant to the said order, status report by way of affidavit of Major Singh
(PPS) Assistant Commissioner of Police-V, Jalandhar on behalf of
respondent Nos.1 to 3 has been filed, wherein it is revealed that the child
was born in the year 2010 who initially resided with the parents for five
years. However, w.e.f. year 2016, the child is being brought up by
respondent Nos.4 and 5 (grand-parents) who got him admitted in Army
1 of 3
08-12-2019 10:14:10 :::
CRWP-743-2019 -2-
School, Jalandhar Cantt. As per the reply, relations between the husband and
wife got strained and the child is living happily with the grand-parents.
Apart from it, the petitioner has already availed the statutory
remedy to seek custody of the child through a petition filed under the
Guardians and SectionWards Act, 1890 which is pending before the Additional
Principal Judge Family Court, Jalandhar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that
even if the petition is pending, the custody can be given to the mother by
exercising an extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. He has placed reliance upon
the judgment passed by this Court in “Jaswinder Kaur Vs. State of Punjab
and others”, 2010 (2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 891.
During the course of hearing, it is not disputed by learned
counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner separated from her husband in
the year 2016 and the petition has been filed in the year 2019, for custody of
the child who is presently nine years old. It is not a case where the custody
of the child was recently taken away illegally from the mother warranting
interference by exercising extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. The judgment
relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is not attracted in the
present set of facts of the present case as in the said case, husband had
expired and the custody of the child was forcibly taken away by the grand-
parents.
Considering the averments made in the petition, this Court does
not find any valid reason to exercise the extra ordinary writ jurisdiction,
particularly when the petitioner has already availed the statutory remedy
2 of 3
08-12-2019 10:14:10 :::
CRWP-743-2019 -3-
under the Guardians and SectionWards Act, 1890.
Petition is dismissed.
(MANOJ BAJAJ)
JUDGE
04.12.2019
vanita
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No
Whether Reportable : Yes No
3 of 3
08-12-2019 10:14:10 :::
