YATHARTH YADAV THRU NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT MEENA YADAV v. STATE OF U.P and ANR
HABC/25634/2021 · 2025-02-14
Subhash Chandra Sharma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 142558 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 142558 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9588 Court No. - 14 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 25634 of 2021 Petitioner :- Yatharth Yadav Thru Natural Guardian Smt Meena Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P And Anr Counsel for Petitioner :- Shambhu Shanker,Om Chandra Sahu Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Shiv Kumar Yadav,Shri Brijesh Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with following relief:
"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the opposite party no. 2 to produce the detenue/petitioner Yatharth Yadav before this Hon'ble Court and to set him free at his liberty. (ii) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may found deem fit, just and proper may also be passed under the
facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice." It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that she is mother of the child Yatharth Yadav, the detenue who is living with his father, therefore, request to direct the opposite party no. 2 to produce the detenue before this Court and to set him free at his liberty, since he is in illegal custody.
Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and contended that in this case, child is living with his father who is natural guardian and now child is aged about 16 years and continuing study at Birla Vidya Mandir,Nainital. Since father is natural guardian, therefore, the detenue cannot be said to be in illegal custody. So far as the transfer of custody is concerned, she may avail remedy before the competent court concerned under the provision of Guardians & Wards Act. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well
as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, it appears that on 6.12.2021 the detenue was called before this Court and he made statement that he was living with his father happily and he denied to live with his mother. His statement was recorded by this Court and presence of detenue was exempted. Since child is living with his father, the natural guardian therefore, his custody cannot be said to be illegal. As a result this petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioner to approach before the competent court to avail alternative remedy, if any.
Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench