AMANPREET KAUR BALE Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a roving writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus to the official respondents for effecting the release of detenue- Harry Bale aged about 14 years who is minor son of petitioner-mother.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is mother and Des Raj is father of detenue- Harry Bale. The marriage between the petitioner and Des Raj ran into rough and both of them are living separately in U.K. Further, petitioner 's son- Harry Bale, although kept on residing with his grand-mother and grand-father, but grand mother of detenue expired in July, 2021 and his grandfather is of 77 years of age and is not keeping good health and is suffering from various old aged ailments. Learned counsel further submits that respondent no.4, namely, Prem Kumar is uncle (Taya) of the detenue who has kept him in illegal custody as the grand- father of the detenue is admitted in hospital.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.4 submits that this petition is not maintainable as it involves disputed questions of fact. The child is very safe and living happily with his grand father-Lachhman Dass since his birth and the petitioner in a clever manner has not impleaded the said Lachman Dass and even she has not impleaded Des Raj who is father of Master Harry Bale as respondents. Learned counsel also submits that this petition has been filed only to harass them with ulterior motive. The petitioner is also having custody of another son aged about 12 years. She is having live-in-relationship with some one after separation from the father of the child. Learned counsel further submits that moreover the petitioner has efficacious remedy under the provisions of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890.