ANITA DANGI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-Anita Dangi, who is maternal grand-mother of detenue-Lavyansh Dhankhar aged about 6 years (hereinafter referred to as the 'minor child') has approached this Court by filing this habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for releasing the aforesaid minor child from the illegal custody of respondents No.4-Manoj Dhankhar (father of the minor child), respondent No.5- Rekha Malik (sister of respondent No.4), respondent No.6-Yogesh Malik (husband of respondent No.5), respondent No.7- Mukesh Dhankhar (brother of respondent No.4), respondent No.8-Manju (sister-in-law of respondent No.4) and respondent No.9 Sumitra (mother of respondent No.4).

(2.) The brief facts as culled out from the paper-book are that the daughter of the petitioner namely, Niharika Dangi was married to Manoj Dhankhar, respondent No.4 and out of this wedlock, one son who is the detenue in the present case, was born on 18/1/2016. The marriage ran into rough weather resulting into grappling with multiplicity of litigations between the parties. Respondent No.4 filed Petition under the provisions of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 and Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 before the Family Court, Rohtak seeking custody of the minor child which is pending adjudication before the Family Court, Rohtak for 7/9/2022. During the pendency of the aforesaid petition, mother of the child moved an application for seeking necessary permission from the Family Court to take the minor child abroad which has been dismissed by the Family Court vide its order dtd. 3/2/2022. The father of the minor child also moved an application for modification of visiting rights which has been allowed by the Family Court vide its order dtd. 3/2/2022. Thereafter, mother of the minor child filed CR Nos.646 and 647 of 2022 before this Court challenging the aforesaid two orders of the Family Court which have been dismissed by this Court vide its order dtd. 25/4/2022. It is the case of the petitioner that during the pendency of the aforesaid petition, respondents No.4 and 5 have kidnapped the minor child from his school at Rohtak on 25/8/2022, which resulted into registration of FIR No.335 dtd. 25/8/2022 under Ss. 323, 341, 365 and 506 IPC at Police Station Urban Estate Rohtak by the husband of the petitioner against respondent No.4 and 5. It is alleged that respondents No.4 and 5 in connivance with respondents No.6 to 9 kidnapped the minor child when the daughter of the petitioner was abroad in Ireland. The petitioner finding no other such effective and efficacious remedy, has approached this Court by filing this habeas corpus petition.

(3.) When this matter came up for hearing before this Court on 26/8/2022, notice of motion was issued only to respondents No.1 to 3, at that stage. Vide order dtd. 30/8/2022 passed by this Court, notices were also issued to respondents no.4 to 9 and the Police was directed to produce the minor child before this Court on or before 2/9/2022. As per office report, notices could not be issued to respondents no.4 to 9 for 2/9/2022 as the petitioner did not file process fee.