PRANAV KHAITAN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) During infancy and impressionable age, the care and warmth of the parents are required for the welfare of the child. However, in the instant case two educated persons have failed to discharge their mutual obligations and are not even agreeable to set right their broken home for the sake of their child. The petitioner, namely, Pranav Khaitan (in short, Pranav) has preferred the instant habeas corpus petition levelling serious allegations against his wife, namely, Neha Singhal (in short, Neha) and her parents and relatives and seeking a writ of habeas corpus for production of his child, namely, Ishaan to enable him to take the child with him to United States of America (in short, USA) inter alia on the grounds that Neha had illegally detained Ishaan and had violated the orders of the foreign Court.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that he is a permanent resident of the County of Santa Clara, California, United States of America. He married Neha on 15/7/2014. Such marriage was solemnized at Rourkela and was registered under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. In the month of December, 2014, he along with his wife returned to USA. They were blessed with a male child, namely, Ishaan on 27/1/2016. Ishaan is a citizen of USA by birth. The couple, along with Ishaan, travelled to India on 15/10/2018. Pranav returned to USA on 20/10/2018 and Neha stayed back and was supposed to return to California on 24/2/2019. After Pranav's return to USA, Neha was initially residing along with her parents-in-law in New Town and was admitted in a school in New Town where he studied till the month of May, 2019. In the midst thereof, Neha left her matrimonial house and went back to her parental house at Rourkela. The relationship between the two families deteriorated. Pranav's mother lodged a complaint case at Barasat on 16/4/2019 under the provisions of Protection of Women and Domestic Violation Act (in short, DV Act). Coming to learn about such complaint, Pranav's parents were threatened and as such Pranav's father, namely, Pawan Khaitan (in short, Pawan) lodged a complaint at New Town police station on 25/6/2019. Immediately thereafter Neha filed an application under the Guardians and Wards Act being G.Misc. Case No. 18 of 2021 at Rourkela and the same is still pending. She lodged a further complaint under Ss. 498A, 307 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) against Pranav and his parents on 5/7/2019. Thereafter, Pranav filed an application for custody of child before the Superior Court of California. On 24/7/2019 a temporary order was passed awarding custody of Ishaan to Pranav and the matter was made returnable on 15/8/2019. In spite of notice, Neha did not appear on the said date and recording such absence the Court directed Neha to return Ishaan to Pranav. Thereafter, on 12/9/2019, the Court passed an order observing inter alia that "it is detrimental to the child's best interest for NEHA KHAITAN to have any custody of ISHAAN KHAITAN and that NEHA KHAITAN is abusing ISHAAN KHAITAN and must stop, and that ISHAAN KHAITAN is best protected by removal from NEHA KHAITAN and returned to Pranav KHAITAN's sole custody in California'. In the midst thereof, Pranav obtained an order of dissolution of marriage from USA Court on 19/6/2020 and he was also granted complete legal and physical custody of Ishaan. Stating such facts a complaint was lodged by Pawan at Chetla Police station at Kolkata on 27/7/2020 but in vain and as such on 3/9/2020, Pranav was constrained to prefer the present writ petition.

(3.) Neha entered appearance and filed an affidavit in opposition denying the averments made in the writ petition and stating that this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction since the marriage was solemnized at Rourkela, Odisha and she along with her son resides at Rourkela and Ishaan is studying in Carmel school at Rourkela since the year 2019. It is her case that Pranav obtained the alleged orders from the foreign Court behind her back without serving any notice and by practicing fraud. After the said orders were passed, Pawan filed an application under Sec. 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act being Act VIII Case No. 45 of 2020 on 24/7/2020 at Alipore.