JAYANTI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Awadh Bihari Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Pankaj Saxena, learned Additional Government Advocate-I and Sri Arvind Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State-respondent.

(2.) The present petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus has been filed on behalf of petitioner no.1-corpus through the petitioner no.2 asserting to be her husband, seeking to contend that the petitioner corpus has been illegally detained by her father-respondent no.4.

(3.) Learned Additional Advocate General, has pointed out that instructions have been received to the effect that in terms of an order dated 9.8.2021 passed by the Child Welfare Committee [CWC] constituted under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 [JJ Act], the petitioner no.1, stated to be a minor, has been placed under the care of her father-respondent no.4 and in view thereof since the custody has been handed over pursuant to a judicial order, the same cannot be said to be illegal and the present petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus would not be entertainable. It is pointed out that the order, for placement of a child under the care of a parent, made by the CWC, would be referable to the provisions under sub-rule (8) of Rule 18 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016 [Rules, 2016].