AYESHA THRU. HER MOTHER RAGINI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 7 OTHERS
HABC/177/2025 · 2025-08-11
Saurabh Lavania
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 140299 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 140299 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46816 Court No. - 11 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 177 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ayesha Thru. Her Mother Ragini And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashank Shukla,Prachi Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sharavan Kumar,Udai Pratap Singh,Upendra Kumar Verma Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Shri Upendra Kumar Verma, Advocate has filed short counter affidavit on behalf of respondents no.7 and 8 in Court today, which is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Mayank Sinha, learned AGA for the State-respondents no.1 to 4; Shri Udai Pratap Singh, Advocate, who appeared for respondent no.6 and Shri Upendra Kumar Verma, Advocate, who appeared for respondent no.7 & 8.
3. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner no.2 to get the custody of minor aged about five months, who is in custody of respondent nos. 6 to 8.
4. It would be apt to indicate that respondent no.6/Raja is husband of petitioner no.2 namely Ragini, who is present before this Court and has been identified by Shri Udai Pratap Singh, Advocate.
5. The short counter affidavit has been filed today by respondents no.7 and 8. Thus, affidavit in response to the present petition has not been by respondent no.6/husband of petitioner no.2.
6. The respondents no.7 and 8 based upon notarized adoption deed have filed short counter affidavit and based upon this document it has been stated in the affidavit that with consent of petitioner no.2 the minor is with them.
7. The adoption deed cannot be relied upon for the reason that it has not been registered which is required under law.
8. Accordingly, for the aforesaid reason, this Court finds that custody of minor with respondents no.7 and 8 is not lawful/justified custody.
9. The petition is allowed. Respondent no.7/Arun and respondent no.8/Chando are directed to provide custody of minor/Ayesha to petitioner no.2/Ragini forthwith. Order Date :- 11.8.2025/Mohit Singh/- Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench