LAWS(GJH)-2020-12-889

AJAYBHAI BATUKBHAI DHARAJIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On December 01, 2020
Ajaybhai Batukbhai Dharajiya Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Nishit P. Gandhi, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Manan Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

(2.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(3.) Corpus Poojaben @ Jayshreeben is wife of the petitioner and Divyesh is the son of the petitioner, aged about 2-3 years. Though this is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, wherein a writ of Habeas Corpus is prayed for, some unfortunate facts have come on record. Poojaben @ Jayshreeben, wife of the petitioner is produced before us through Video Conferencing from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal Mr. Mehta. Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP has produced on record a report dated 1.12.2020. The report indicates that the Corpus Divyesh, son of the petitioner, was found from the State of Tamilnadu and the police record, as it stands today, reveals that the Corpus - Poojaben @ Jayshreeben and one Sonu were instrumental in selling the Corpus her own child. We are informed by Mr. Manan Mehta, learned APP that at present Corpus Divyesh is with the petitioner. He being a minor child, the natural course would have been to permit Poojaben @ Jayshreeben to have custody of minor child Divyesh, however, in facts of this case, which are unfortunate, though Poojaben @ Jayshreeben is mother, considering the allegation against her that she was instrumental in selling Corpus Divyesh, custody of Corpus Divyesh may remain with the petitioner father. Under such circumstances, we feel it deem to give custody of Corpus Divyesh to the petitioner who happens to be the father and natural guardian. Mr. Mehta, learned Additional Sessions Judge has also ably assisted us in knowing the background of the petitioner and we have been informed through Mr. Mehta, learned Additional Sessions Judge that the petitioner is working as Workman in some private concern, situated near Gondal City, District Rajkot.