Manoj Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 3315 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Manoj Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 17 March, 2025

                                       Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:036013



139


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                               CRWP-2578-2025
                                               Date of Decision:17.03.2025

Manoj Kumar                                                ...Petitioner

                                       vs.

State of Punjab and others                                      ...Respondents

Coram :     Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat

Present:    Ms. Dolli Sharma, Advocate with
            Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab.

                                ***

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus

to direct the respondent No.3 to produce the alleged detenue namely Dhruv

Kashyap, aged about 05 years, son of the petitioner, who is stated to be in the

illegal custody of respondents No.4 to 9.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the

marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with respondent No.4 namely

Gangotri on 08.05.2019 at Amritsar. Out of the said wedlock, a son namely

Dhruv Kashyap was born on 31.01.2020. There were temperamental differences

between both the parties and the respondent No.4 had left the company of the

petitioner on 21.09.2021; however, while leaving the company of the petitioner,

the respondent No.4 had taken away Dhruv Kashyap, alleged detenue along

with her. She further contends that thereafter, respondent No.4 had filed various

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:036013

CRWP-2578-2025 -2

cases against the petitioner by levelling false and baseless allegations and the

details of all the cases pending between the parties is as follows:-

Sr. No. Case Details Cast Title Case Status

1. COMA/1121/2023 Gangotri VersusDecided on (Complaint under Section 12 of Manoj Kumar and09.12.2023, Domestic Violence Act, 2005) Ors. Withdrawn by complainant, namely Gangotri

2. HMA/1413/2023 (PetitionGangotri VersusDecided on under Section 13 of HinduManoj Kumar 09.12.2023, Marriage Act, 1955) Withdrawn by petitioner, namely Gangotri.

3. MNT/36/2022 Gangotri VersusDecided on (Petition under Section 125 ofManoj Kumar 09.12.2023, Cr.P.C.) Withdrawn by petitioner, namely Gangotri.

4. CS/2363/2023 (Petition forManoj KumarDecided on permanent injunction) Versus Gangotri11.05.2024, and Ors. Withdrawn by petitioner

5. GW/127/2022 (Petition underManoj KumarDecided on Guardians and Wards Act,Versus Gangotri 22.07.2023 Held 1890) that petitioner is entitled for the visitation rights of the minor child, namely Dhruv. and respondent, was directed to hand over the custody of the minor child on the last Friday of every month at 5PM to the petitioner at the nearby. park situated near the

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:036013

house of the respondent.

6. CS/2333/2022 (Petition forManoj KumarPending for permanent injunction) Versus Gangotri20.03.2024 and Ors.

7. HMA/3204/2024 (PetitionManoj KumarPending for under Section 9 of HinduVersus Gangotri 20.02.2024 Marriage Act, 1955)

8. CM/511/2024 (ContemptManoj KumarPending for petition against order datedVersus Gangotri 20.02.2024 22.07.2024 GW/127/2022 in GW/127/

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that at various

stages of litigation pending between the parties, respondent No.4 wrongly stated

that she was ready to join the company of the petitioner, however, she never

return to the matrimonial home. Even she is not providing the basic education

to the alleged detenue and is not taking proper care of him. She further

contends that the petitioner had filed a case bearing No. GW/127/2023 on

06.11.2023 for taking custody of the alleged detenue and respondent No.4 was

arrayed as a respondent in the said petition. Ultimately, vide order dated

22.07.2024, the petition was decided by the Family Court against the present

petitioner(petitioner before Family Court also) by making the following

observations:-

9.So, in the light of above discussed law, I am of the considered opinion that petitioner cannot be held entitled to the custody of the minor son Dharuv Kashyap when he is of just four and half years old. If at all petitioner feels that respondent does not have good financial capacity to up bring the child, nothing prevents him from shouldering the financial responsibility of the child and he is at liberty to financially support the child Dhanuv Kashyap. Even though, petitioner is held not entitled to the custody of minor child

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:036013

CRWP-2578-2025 -4

but still, petitioner cannot be deprived of the right to shower his love and affection on the child. Respondent is directed to hand over the custody of the minor child on the last Friday of every month at 5:00 P.M to petitioner at the nearby park situated near the house of respondent and petitioner shall then hand over back the custody of the child at the same park in the evening of last Sunday of the month at 5.00 PM. Petitioner shall also be entitled to have the custody of the child on the morning of Diwali Festival from 9.00 AM to 3 PM and on the eve of Lohri Festival from 4pm to 8 PM.

10. In the light of above said discussion, petition of petitioner for the grant of relief of custody fails and is dismissed for the said relief though petitioner is held entitled to the visitation rights of the child Dharuv Kashyap. Respondent is directed to hand over the custody of the minor child on the last Friday of every month at 5 PM to petitioner at the nearby park situated near the house of respondent and petitioner shall then hand over back the custody of the child at the same park in the evening of last Sunday of the month at 5.00 PM. Petitioner shall also be entitled to have the custody of the child on the morning of Diwali Festival from 9.00 AM to 3 PM and on the eve of Lohri Festival from 4pm to 8 PM.

Decree be prepared."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that inspite of

complying with the orders passed by the Family Court and handling over the

custody of the detenue to the petitioner, respondent No.4 had stopped coming to

the Court for any further proceedings. Moreover, the petitioner also filed a

contempt petition bearing No.CM/511/2024 on 01.08.2024 to initiate contempt

proceedings against respondent No.4. The Family Court has already issued

warrants against the respondent No.4, but despite warrants, respondent No.4 is

evading the proceedings as she did not want to hand over the custody of the

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:036013

CRWP-2578-2025 -5

detenue to the petitioner. Further, the petitioner has already submitted various

representations to Commissioner of Police, Amritsar (Annexures P-4 and P-5)

but no action has been taken by the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar in the

present case.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and

perused the record carefully.

6. From the record, it is apparent that the petitioner had already filed a

petition under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act before the Family

Court, Amritsar for taking custody of the Dhruv Kashyap, alleged detenue from

respondent No.4. After considering the evidence led by the present petitioner,

the Family Court Amritsar held that the present petitioner (petitioner in Trial

Court also), cannot be held entitled the custody of Dhruv Kashyap. Still further,

the Court held that the respondent No.4 would hand over the custody of the

minor child on the last Friday of every month at 05:00 PM to the present

petitioner at the nearby park, situated near the house of respondent No.4 and the

petitioner shall hand over the custody of the child/alleged detenue at the same

park in the evening of last Sunday of the month at 05:00 P.M. Apart from that,

it was further directed that the petitioner would be entitled to have the custody

of the child on the morning of Diwali festival from 09:00 AM to 03:PM and on

the eve of Lohri festival from 04:00 PM to 08 P.M. Thus, it is apparent from the

judgment (Annexure P-2) passed by the Family Court, it is evident that the

issue of custody has already been finally settled between the parties by way of a

judgment, which has attained finality and admittedly, no appeal has been filed

by the petitioner against the said judgment. Still further, after due consideration

of the material, the Competent Court has already held that the custody of minor

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:036013

CRWP-2578-2025 -6

Dhruv Kashyap/alleged detenue cannot be given to present petitioner as the

child is minor and he cannot be deprived of the right to love and affection of the

mother. Apart from that, the Family Court has also made arrangements for

visitation rights and the petitioner is entitled to knock the doors of the same

Court for implementation of the judgment (Annexure P-2). Further, the Family

Court has already issued warrants against the respondent No.4 and the

petitioner has wrongly moved representations to Commissioner of Police,

Amritsar. In fact, the Commissioner of Police, Amritsar is not empowered to

initiate any action with regard to the proceedings, which are admittedly pending

before the Family Court.

7. In view of the above discussion, this Court has no hesitation to

hold that the present petition is totally mis-conceived and is liable to be

dismissed.

8. Ordered accordingly.

                                                     (N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
17.03.2025                                                JUDGE
hitesh

                   Whether speaking/reasoned :          Yes/No
                   Whether reportable            :      Yes/No




                                        6 of 6