SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Priyanka Dhanda And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 19 December, 2017

CRWP No. 408 of 2017 -1


CRWP No. 408 of 2017
Date of decision : December 19, 2017

Priyanka Dhanda and another
……. Petitioner

State of Haryana and others
…….. Respondents


Present:- Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate and
Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG., Haryana.

Mr. Aashish Chopra, Advocate
for respondent No.4.



The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of

the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure in

the nature of Habeas Corpus to produce the detenue Tanish minor son of

petitioner No.1 and brother of petitioner No.2 who is also aged 11 years.

The alleged illegal custody is of respondent No.4 who is none else but of

the father.

In view of the order dated 11.4.2017 the child was

produced before this Court on 14.4.2017. Interaction accordingly took

place. As noticeable the marriage was of the year 2003 and the child has

been born on 18.12.2009 whereas petitioner No.2 had been born on

2.6.2005. It also transpired that respondent No.4 had filed proceedings

before the Guardian court on 30.3.2017 under Section 7 and 10 of the
1 of 3
24-12-2017 03:07:40 :::
CRWP No. 408 of 2017 -2

Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 for his appointment as a sole and exclusive

guardian as well for grant of exclusive custody of the said child. Before the

said petition came to be listed, a FIR dated 2.4.2017 (Annexure P-1) had

also been lodged by petitioner No.1. The concern of the father was that the

child was required some therapy session.

Resultantly, it was directed that both the parents

including the mother shall also be involved in the therapy session and the

therapist should interact with the child directly without the parents

interfering. It is also pertinent to notice that both the children were going to

common school namely Shri Ram School, Gurugram. On account of the

efforts made the parties had gone back together to the matrimonial home

and the proceedings had been deferred to 28.4.2017.

On the said date, it was noticed that the elder child may have to

undergo some counseling on account of friction between the parents.

Accordingly, the proceedings were further deferred to 8.8.2017, since the

matter before the Family Court was fixed for July and the Court had been

informed that therapy sessions are continuing.

It is not disputed that written statement has also been filed

before the Family Court. Thus, it is not disputed by the counsel that the

couple continue to stay together whereas the petition for custody is still

pending. On this factual position, though the husband and wife are living

under a common roof but they are at variance on account of their

temperamental differences with each other.

Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances, this Court

is of the opinion that the present petition has been rendered infructuous as

such. Accordingly, the counsel have agreed on instructions from the parents

2 of 3
24-12-2017 03:07:42 :::
CRWP No. 408 of 2017 -3

present in Court that the custody would remain joint of both the parents and

they would stay together in H. No. D-35, Oakwood Estate DLF Phase II,

Gurugram, during the pendency of the Guardian Court proceedings. This

arrangement is totally interim and in case any party wishes to file any

application for any other relief, it will be open for them to approach the said

Gurardian Court. It is further clarified that as per order dated 14.4.2017 and

28.4.2017 the therapy sessions of the children would continue till they need

the same.

The present Criminal Writ petition stands disposed of.

December 19, 2017

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable No

3 of 3
24-12-2017 03:07:42 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation