JITHIN K PURUSHU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When this matter was considered by another Bench of this Court on 6/5/2025, after interacting with the parties, the following order had been indited: "We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.7 and 8. 2. Petitioner is the sonin-law of respondent Nos.7 and 8.

(2.) Smt.A.Parvathi Menon - learned counsel for the petitioner, conceded that her client is now staying - in obedience to the above order - with respondents 7 and 8, as also the child, in the latter's residence and that the relationship between them has moved cordially. She, therefore, prayed that the child be released to her client; but undertaking that the maternal grandparents, namely respondents 7 and 8 will have unrestricted access to her, either physically or through phone and another methods. She explained that her client has nothing against his in-laws and therefore, that he is also willing to take the child to them whenever they want.

(3.) Sri.Mohan Kumar - learned counsel for the party respondents, graciously accepted the afore suggestions saying that his clients never want permanent custody of the child, but is concerned about her as any grandparent would be. He added that his clients have been taking care of the child ever since the death of her mother and therefore, that they have developed close affinity to her. He prayed that his clients be, therefore, allowed full access to her whenever they want, as has been suggested by Smt.A.Parvathi Menon.