Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137423-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 297 of 2025 Appellant :- Aradhya Singh and another Respondent :- State of U.P. and 8 others Counsel for Appellant :- Ankit Kumar Pal, Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Rajiv Singh (S.C.), Shiv Om Vikram Singh Chauhan Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 11.03.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. - 197 of 2025, whereby the petition, filed by the appellant No. 2-maternal grandmother of the corpus against father, paternal grandfather, grandmother, uncle and aunt has been dismissed. 2. The petition was filed, inter alia, with the allegations that the minor girl child, one and a half year old, was in illegal detention of her father and his parents/family. 3. Various submissions were made regarding the fact that the mother of the minor child was murdered and allegations were made against the husband and the family of the in-laws. The minor child was in custody of the respondents, which was illegal and therefore, the custody of the corpus be handed over to petitioner No. 2-maternal grandmother. 4. The petition was rejected and learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that the custody of the minor child cannot be said to be illegal since father was the natural guardian, who was having custody of the corpus before his arrest. Further observations were made that if the appellant was aggrieved and was seeking custody of the corpus, the forum was entirely different and she was free to choose a proper forum available under the law. Feeling aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant reiterated the submissions mainly pertaining to the allegations against the father and grandparents of the corpus of their having murdered her mother and that the minor child was not safe in the custody of the respondents. 6. Counsel for the respondents made submissions that the minor child is in lawful custody of the respondents and filing of a Habeas Corpus Writ Petition is wholly misconceived and the same has rightly been dismissed by learned Single Judge. 7. We have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 8. By order dated 28.05.2025, we required the parties to file affidavits to indicate the welfare of the minor child was to remain in whose custody. Though affidavits have been exchanged, the appellant has essentially again indulged in making allegations pertaining to the criminal case pending against the husband despite the fact that irrespective of the charges against the respondent, the fact of the matter is that the custody of the corpus, since the beginning, is with the respondents and it is not the case that the custody has been taken from the appellant No. 2 so as to reclaim the custody. The claim made pertaining to the status of the appellants, itself is not sufficient to claim the welfare of the minor child unless specific allegations are made pertaining to any threat to the minor child in remaining with the respondents. 9. In view thereof, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by learned Single Judge. As observed by learned Single Judge, the appellant No. 2 is free to take appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law. 10. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 Mukesh Pal (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad