Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87499 Court No. - 76 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 302 of 2025 Petitioner :- Aryan Minor/Corpus And Another Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Puneet Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Krishna Kant Shukla,Rajendra Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and perused the record. 2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a writ, order, or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus, commanding and directing the respondent authorities to produce the corpus, Aryan (minor son of petitioner no. 2), from the custody of respondent no. 4 (her husband) before this Court. 3. Vide order dated 30.04.2025, this Court directed respondent no. 4, Rajendra, through the Superintendent of Police, Mahoba, to produce the minor, Aryan (son of respondent no. 4), before this Court. In compliance with the said order, the corpus has been produced by respondent no. 4. Petitioner no. 2 (the mother of the minor) is also present before this Court. 4. Based on the statement made by petitioner no. 2, alleging that respondent no. 4 is engaged in an adulterous relationship with another woman—an allegation which, if substantiated, could have a direct bearing on his moral suitability to retain custody of a minor child and impact the welfare of the child. This Court, vide order dated 07.05.2025, directed the police to conduct a discreet and comprehensive local inquiry into the matter. The police was also directed to ascertain the veracity of the allegations and submit a detailed factual report before the Court on the next date of hearing, to assist in determining whether the continued custody of the minor with respondent no. 4 is in consonance with the child's best interests. 5. Upon perusal of the inquiry report submitted by the learned Additional Government Advocate, it emerges that petitioner no. 2 has voluntarily left the matrimonial home without any allegation of immediate threat or coercion. The report further indicates that the dispute between the parties is rooted in matrimonial discord, and does not disclose any element of unlawful detention or custodial illegality. Significantly, the inquiry has not yielded any credible, cogent, or corroborative material to support the petitioner’s allegation that respondent no. 4 is involved in an adulterous relationship. In the absence of substantiated evidence, such an allegation remains speculative and insufficient, in itself, to disqualify respondent no. 4 from retaining custody of the minor child. 6. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that remedy of habeas corpus is not maintainable, as it cannot be invoked in matters involving matrimonial discord or custody disputes arising out of failed marital relationships, unless there is clear evidence of illegal detention. 7. A writ of habeas corpus is a prerogative writ aimed at safeguarding an individual's liberty by providing an immediate and effective remedy for release from unlawful or improper detention. The writ can also be invoked to restore the custody of a minor to their lawful guardian if they have been wrongfully deprived of it. The detention of a minor by a person not entitled to legal custody is considered equivalent to illegal detention, warranting the issuance of a writ for the minor's custody. 8. The law governing guardianship and custody matters is primarily encapsulated in the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, under which a guardian may be appointed or entitled to custody upon a proper application filed by a person asserting such a claim. 9. In the present case, the petitioner no.2 has failed to demonstrate any such unlawful detention or illegal restraint on the liberty of petitioner no.1. In absence of prima facie evidence of coercion or confinement, no case is made out for exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 10. In view of the above, and keeping in mind the alternative remedies available under the appropriate civil and criminal fora, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 22.5.2025 A. Tripathi Vinod Diwakar,J. Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad