LAWS(ALL)-2020-12-105

MEENAKSHI Vs. STATE OF U. P.

Decided On December 02, 2020
MEENAKSHI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF U. P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A young child ought to be and has a right to be in the care and company of his parents. The parents together are a young child's world. It is together that they groom him into his youth. It is together that they ensure the over all development of his personality in its myriad facets. But marriage, like life, some time takes an unpleasant turn, where the spouses could turn into an estranged couple. It is here that a young child faces one of the biggest tragedies of his life. His/ her world comprising the two parents comes apart. It is in this situation that the Court, in the exercise of its parens patriae jurisdiction, called upon to perform the onerous task of keeping the young child's world, as much together as can be. The better the Court can bring this about, it could be some recompense to a child's devastated world. This petition for a writ of habeas corpus, instituted by Master Anav's mother, the first petitioner, asking the Court to liberate the minor from his father's custody by entrusting the minor into hers, is about a young child's devastated world.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this cause are these: Smt. Meenakshi, the first petitioner and Ram Narayan, the ninth respondent married according to Hindu rites on 20.04.2014. The couple lived together as man and wife for a period of about four years. Meenakshi says that she had a tumultuous marriage. In her husband's home, she stayed along with her in-laws. During her stay with her husband, she was tortured, both physically and mentally, in connection with dowry that was demanded. Meenakshi had lost her father some fifteen years ago. It was her mother, who had settled this marriage for her. Her mother had given in dowry all necessaries for a household apart from Rs.5 lakhs in cash, besides ornaments. During her stay at her husband's, Meenakshi came to know, as she alleges, that her husband had an amorous relationship with his sister-in-law (bhabhi) and another girl from the village, to which she objected in vain. She claims that this further accentuated her torture by her husband and in-laws, forcing her to abandon her marriage and go back to her mother's home. She went back to her mother on 04.06.2018. A son, named Anav, was born of this rather short lived wedlock of parties. He was born on 20.09.2016. For the present, Anav is aged about 4 hours.

(3.) It is also claimed by Meenakshi that after her initial exit from the matrimonial home on 04.06.2018, she attempted reproachment a number of times. She went back to her husband's home, but on each occasion found herself unwelcome. There was a concerted effort to jettison the from her matrimonial home by her husband and the in-laws. The discord between parties was mediated by kinsmen, which resulted in what Meenakshi claims to be a mutual divorce. It is a private settlement, engrossed on a stamp paper, worth Rs.100/- and notarized. It is a document dated 04.12.2018, executed at Panipat, Haryana. Apart from parties, it is attested by witnesses, who appear to be the mediators or panchas of some kind.