1 RRR,J & MRK,J W.P.No.25763/2024 APHC010502572024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3508] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 25763/2024 Between: Shaik Saradar Nayeem Ghouse ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SHAIK MD UMAR ABDULLAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY Y 2. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri Shaik MD Umar Abdullah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned Advocate General appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and Sri Y. Mallikharjun Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 and 6. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the 5th respondent had left his son, viz., Master Shaik Fuzil, in the care and custody of his family, when he 2 RRR,J & MRK,J W.P.No.25763/2024 went away to United Arab Emirates (UAE) for earning his livelihood. Thereafter, the 5th respondent had forcibly taken away the child from the custody of the family. The petitioner also contends that the child was being mistreated by the 5th respondent and his wife, who is none other than the sister of the mother of the child. On the basis of these allegations, the petitioner sought custody of the minor child on the ground that the interests of the minor child would be best served by keeping him in their custody. 3. We have interacted with the child and the 5th respondent. We have heard the version of the 5th respondent. We are not going into the veracity of these allegations and the statements made by the 5th respondent. However, we have seen the manner in which the child is attached to the 5th respondent. In such circumstances, we do not find that continuous custody of the child with the 5th respondent will be injurious to the interests of the child. 4. It is settled law that in such cases, it is the interests of the child, which is paramount of other considerations would have to be subordinated to this paramount requirement. In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to close this writ petition, as no further orders are necessary in this matter. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Js. 3 RRR,J & MRK,J W.P.No.25763/2024 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.25763 of 2024 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao) 21st January, 2025 Js 4 RRR,J & MRK,J W.P.No.25763/2024