PRAVEEN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. N. Sahai, J. This is a petition for writ of habeas corpus raises question regarding detention and custody of a child aged ahout 7 years, Pravin Kumar Sharma by name. Tie child is at present in police custody and is detained in Rajkiya Kishore Grajh, Char. dpur Sayau Distt Bijnor before the police took the child in its custody, he was in the custody of the petitioners and was taken away from their custody by the police during investigation on the basis of a first information report of case crime No. 508 of 1993 under Sections 363, 342, 352 and 506 I. P. C. of P. S. Sahawan Distt. Badaun. The said crime case has been registered by the police on this basis of a report lodged by Ramesh against Lakhichandra, Smt. Urmila, wife of Lakhichandra and Km, Pushpa daughter of Lakhichandra and Hukumchandra S/o Dwarka Prasad in respect of the kidnapping of his son on 1. 4. 1987. The petitioners claimed that the child was handed over to them by Dr. R. K. Vashya in Raj Hdspital, Tikatgunj Distt. Badaun, soon after the birth of the child on 31-8-1987. The certificate to that effect (An-the writ petition) shows that a child was porn to a poor woman and same was handed over to the petitioners on 31. 8. 1987 for being brought up and for his maintenance.

(2.) BESIDES the State of U. P. and others Ramesh who has lodged the said F. I. R. has also been irnpleaded as respondent No. 4. Ramesh his filed a counter affidavit in this case C. J. ML, Haridwar, who has been irnpleaded as respondent No. 2 has also filed a counter affidavit. It is under his orders that the child is now kept in the Rajkiya Kishore Grih as mentioned above.

(3.) IT is well-known that in a proceeding relating to the custody and guardianship of a minor, it is the welfare of the child which is of paramount importance. After hearing the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties, we have formed an opinion that atmosphere in the Rajkiya Kishore Grih may not be very congenial to the growth and proper development of the child. We, therefore, requested the learned Counsel for the parties to suggest some other institution where the child may be kept during the pendency of the proceedings. Fortunately, learned Counsel for the parties have made an agreed statement that during the pendency of the proceedings, the child may be kept in Gurukul Kangri, Haridwar. The petitioners are ready and willing to bear the necessary expenses in this behalf. This is one aspect of the matter. At the same time we feel that all the medical tests which are necessary should be performed expeditiously and the matter relating to the identity of the child should be decided as early as possible, otherwise it may prejudicially affect not only the interest of the parties but also the interest of the child. We are, therefore, of the opinion that such tests should be completed within a month.