ANIL KUMAR SINGH Vs. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in this writ petition has prayed for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. His grievance is that his minor daughter and son/ namely Nidhi Singh @ Romi and Abhisekh @ Honey have been detained by his father -in -law (Respondent No. 1), namely, Vijay Kumar Singh. Kumari Nidhi was born on 10.11.88 while Abhisek was born on 23.4.93. Apparently, both are minors. The claim for their custody is naturally based on the fact that the petitioner being the natural guardian is entitled to the custody of his children. It is not disputed that the wife of the petitioner died of burn injuries on 23.8.94.

(2.) On the other hand, Respondent -Vijay Kumar Singh contends that his daughter died under mysterious circumstnaces and he suspects the complicity of the petitioner. He, therefore, prayed that no relief should be granted to the petitioner, since the children are safe in the custody.

(3.) Having regard to the controversy before us, we are of the opinion that the matter can be more appropriately dealt with by the Court dealing with guardinaship matters. It is no doubt true that a natural guardian of a minor is entitled to the custody of the minor. But, where a dispute arises, the Court has not only to consider the legal rights of the person claiming custody, but also the welfare of the minor. That involves an investigation into disputed questions of fact. While in the instant case, the petitioner contends that being the natural guardian he is entitled to the custody of his minor children, and that there are no circumstances of factors which may lead the Court to conclude that petitioner's custody of such minors is not in their interest, Respondent No. 1 contends that having regard to the suspicious circumstances in which mother of the minor children died, it would not be safe to entrust the custody of the minor children to the petitioner. He also submits that the minro daughter Kumari Nidhi was adopted by her grand -mother, namely, Bala Minz Singh.