K PREMALATHA Vs. KUMARAPANDIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the body of petitioner's minor sons namely Prem Kumar aged 14, Praveen Kumar aged 11 who are illegally confined by the second and third respondents and hand over the custody of the said children to petitioner as a natural guardian.)Raja Elango .J.The petitioner, who is the mother of the detenues, by name, Prem Kumar aged 14 years and Praveen Kumar aged 11 years has filed this habeas corpus petition for production of her minor children, who are illegally confined by the second and third respondents.

(2.) COMPENDIOUSLY and concisely, the relevant facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this petition would run thus:(a) The petitioner married the first respondent, viz., Kumarapandian on 04.12.1994 as per Hindu rites and customs at Vellore subsequent to the marriage, they lived together in Vellore District consequently, they went to Singapore out of the wedlock, two sons were born, their respective date of birth being 15.01.1996 and 10.07.1998. Further, due to some misunderstanding that arose between the petitioner and the first respondent, the first respondent filed HMOP No,56 of 2003 on the file of the learned Sub Judge, Vellore, seeking divorce, and at the intervention of the elders, the same was withdrawn.(b) Again by filing HMOP No,60 of 2006, the first respondent obtained an exparte decree of divorce and custody of the children on 02.11.2007, and the same was not intimated to the petitioner. Without informing the order obtained by the first respondent in his favour, he continued to live with the petitioner at Singapore. On 31.01.2009, the first respondent without informing the petitioner brought the children to India. Ever since from that date, the children were with the first respondent. Inasmuch as the first respondent has taken the custody of the children by a deceptive manner, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of Habeas Corpus Petition for restoration of the custody of the children.

(3.) WE are not inclined to state anything regarding the allegations made by the respective parties, inasmuch as the allegations are not a matter to be decided by this Court and the same is not in question before us.