VEENA BISWANATH MITRA Vs. KAMLA ASHOK AHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the learned counsel for the rival parties.

(2.) The parents of a minor child-Anurag have approached this court seeking a writ of habeas corpus to direct the respondents to produce the said minor son of the petitioners and a further direction to respondent No.1, grandmother of the said child, to hand over his custody to them. The said child is at the center of the controversy where the parents on the one hand and the grandmother on the other are claiming custody of the child.

(3.) The sequence of events leading to filing of the present writ petition starts from the marriage of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 on 25.02.2008. The said child was born out of the wedlock and now he is 12 years old. He was living with the petitioners i.e. his mother and father at Chakan, Pune and he took education from nursery to 4th standard at the Pius Memorial School in Chakan, Pune. Petitioner No.2 i.e. the father of the child is an Electrical Engineer, working in a Multinational Company - 3M India Ltd., as Manager (Production and Planning). 3. In August, 2019 petitioner No.1 i.e. the mother of the child, suffered from gynecological problem for which she was advised surgery and to take complete rest. In this backdrop, the petitioners decided that while petitioner No.1 would undergo treatment for the said health issue, in order that there should not be any loss of studies of the child, he along with his mother i.e. petitioner No.1 would shift to Nasik where respondent No.1 i.e. the mother of petitioner No.1 resides. Accordingly, petitioner No.1 along with the child shifted to Nasik in a flat in the society in which respondent No.1 resides. The said respondent No.1 resides at Nasik with two unmarried sisters of petitioner No.1. The father of petitioner No.1 and her unmarried brother reside separately at Nasik. The petitioners thought that during the period when petitioner No.1 would undergo medical treatment at a hospital in Nasik, respondent No.1 and sisters of petitioner No.1 could take care of her needs as well as those of the child. Petitioner No.1 and the child shifted to Nasik to reside in the society in which respondent No.1 is having a flat and he was admitted in the 5th standard in St Xavier's High School at Nasik. Petitioner No.2 bought a flat in the same society for the convenience of petitioner No.1 and the child and he used to visit them from Pune on weekends.