Monday, 13, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Priyanka Bahuguna vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 1205 UK

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1205 UK
Judgement Date : 18 February, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Priyanka Bahuguna vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 18 February, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
Sl.           proceedings or
      Date                                        COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
D1-
01                                HABC No.3 of 2026
                                  Priyanka Bahuguna                            ...Petitioner
                                                          Versus
                                  State of Uttarakhand and Others           ...Respondents

                                  Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Hon'ble Siddhartha Sah, J.

Mr. Parikshit Saini and Ms. Sukhwani Singh, Advocates for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Virk, D.A.G. with Mr. Rajesh Joshi, Brief Holder for the State.

It is a Habeas Corpus petition filed by the mother seeking the corpus of her child, with regard to which the petitioner has also filed a missing report.

Learned State Counsel was required to get status of the missing report.

Today, learned State Counsel submits that, in fact, the child is with his father in Bhagalpur, Bihar, and he is safe.

How is Habeas Corpus petition maintainable in such matters? These are the child's custody matters.

Reference has been made to the judgment in the case of Yashita Sahu Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others, (2020) 3 SCC 67.

Are not the facts of that case quite distinct where the mother was required to stay in United States of America under the orders of the court of competent jurisdiction so that the joint parenting could be given to both the parents, but, in violation of it, the mother had come to India? Is not the present case quite distinguishable? Why this petition should be entertained? Heard on this point, but not concluded.

List this matter on 25.03.2026.

(Siddhartha Sah J.) (Ravindra Maithani J.) 18.02.2026 RV

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter