NATASHA SONDUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 1st and 2nd petitioners are minor children of the 3rd petitioner and the 5th respondent. Their marriage took place at Bangalore. The 1st petitioner was born on 19-9-1993 at Stockholm, Sweden and is presently aged about 11 years. The 2nd petitioner was born on 9-2-2001 at sydney, Australia, and is presently aged about 3 years. Petitioners and 5th respondent are citizens of Sweden. The 3rd petitioner and 5th respondent were initially living at stockholm after their marriage in 1989 till June, 1997 when they shifted to Mumbai and New Delhi and thereafter in June, 1999 to Sydney, Australia. Subsequently, the family moved to Stockholm, Sweden, in January, 2002 and once again to Sydney, Australia. Since the beginning of 2003, till December, 2003, they have been residing at sydney, Australia.

(2.) THE 5th respondent with 1st and 2nd petitioners arrived in India on a six months' non-extendable Tourist Visa from Sydney in the 3rd week of December, 2003 and travelled to bangalore with their mother's family on 26-12-2003. According to their original programme, all of them would return to sydney on 27-1 -2004. On 24-1 -2004 the 5th respondent informed the 3rd petitioner that she is cancelling the air tickets and she and her children would not be travelling on 26-1-2004 to Sydney. But the 3rd petitioner under those circumstances had to get back to Sydney alone. However, he returned to bangalore on 3-2-2004. He went to Mumbai where he met 5th respondent, and found out that she has no intention of ever returning back to Sydney. The 3rd petitioner with the consent of the 5th respondent took the 1st petitioner along with him to Hubli on 13-2-2004 and thereafter to Bangalore on 23-2-2004.

(3.) WHEN the 3rd petitioner did not return the 1st petitioner as promised, the 5th respondent filed a petition for judicial separation in the Family Court at Bandra and mumbai and also sought for the custody of the child in Petition No. A 531/2004. In the said proceedings, the 3rd petitioner was restrained from taking the 1st petitioner out of India, Bangalore or Mumbai. In that background, petitioners have preferred these Writ petitions for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents 1 to 4 from extending the Visa of the minor petitioners 1 and 2 or to make any change in the status of their visa, grant fresh Visa to person of Indian origin status or change their Citizenship at the instance of the 5th respondent and permit the petitioners to return to their habitual place of residence viz. Sydney, New Sought wales, Australia, along with their father.