- 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT PETITION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO.85 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MRS. SHABANA A. @ SHABANA KAUSAR D/O MR. AHMED-UL-HAQ AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT No.1014 SOBHA CHRYSANTHEMUM THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD NARAYANAPURA BENGALURU-560 077 ALSO AT: BOGANVILLA FURNISHING PVT. LTD. 32B, 8TH BLOCK, 80 FEET ROAD ARKAVATHI LAYOUT JAKKUR VILLAGE BENGALURU-560 064 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: SOBHA HRC PRISTINE APARTMENT No.4182 18TH FLOOR, 4TH BLOCK OPPOSITE TO K.V. JAYARAM ROAD AMRUTHALLI MAIN ROAD JAKKUR LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 092 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) - 2 AND: 1 . DR. MOHAMED ATEEQ S/O LATE PARAY JAN R. AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS RESIDING AT No.9, 1ST FLOOR RAJAPPA BLOCK, 2ND CROSS CHURCH ROAD, J.C. NAGAR BENGALURU-560 006 WORKING AT AL BIDAA DENTAL CENTRE PO BOX No.14776 BUILDING No.267 NUAIJA WEST NEAR OLIVE INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL DOHA, STATE OF QATAR 2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3 . COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU CITY NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.A. BELLIAPPA, SPP-1 A/W SRI. THEJESH P., HCGP FOR R2 & R3) THIS WP(HC) IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT No.1 HEREIN TO PRODUCE THE CHILDREN BEFORE THIS COURT. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 19.08.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, ANU SIVARAMAN J., PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: - 3 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:- "Issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondent No.1 herein to produce the children before this Hon'ble Court." 2. We have heard Shri. Madhukar Deshpande, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri. B.A. Belliappa, learned Special Public Prosecutor- I along with Shri. Thejesh. P, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents No.2 and 3. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the writ petition is filed in view of the fact that respondent No.1 has taken away the children and is denying the petitioner her valuable rights as a parent. We notice that there is a G & WC Case No.11/2020 filed before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru and that orders have been passed thereon. It is further submitted that as - 4 against an order passed by the Judge of the Family Court, a writ petition is also filed by the petitioner and is pending before this Court. 4. In support of his contentions, he has relied on the following decisions:- • Tejaswini Gaud and Others v. Shekhar Jagdish Prasad Tewari and Others reported in (2019) 7 SCC 42; and • Vishal Verma v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others dated 16.01.2025 in W.P.(CRL) 2808/2024 and CRL.M.A. 110/2025. 5. The writ petition averments are that O.S.No.10/2020 was filed by the respondent - husband seeking Dissolution of Marriage and the petitioner had filed her written statement in the said suit. Thereafter, G & WC No.11/2020 was filed by the respondent before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru and objections were filed by the petitioner. It is stated that in the last week of August 2021, the respondent had requested that the children should be permitted to accompany him to Doha for vacation. It is - 5 stated that initially though the petitioner refused; upon repeated requests and on an assurance that her brother would accompany the children, the petitioner had agreed to send the children to Doha without seeking legal advice. However, thereafter, the children were not returned to India. It is further stated that the petitioner on 19.04.2024 filed an I.A.No.8 under Section 12 of G & WC Act, seeking direction to the first respondent to produce the children and to restore their custody to the petitioner, which had been heard and after multiple hearings, the Family Court had passed an order dated 15.04.2025 stating that I.A.No.8 requires evidence and would be heard along with the main petition. It is against the said order that the petitioner has preferred a writ petition, which is pending before this Court. It is also clear from the order sheet of the G & W C No.11/2020 that the children had been kept present before the Family Court and the Family Court had interacted with the children. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case for this Court to exercise its extraordinary original jurisdiction under - 6 Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and to issue a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus for the production of children. This is a matter where the normal law of the land exercised through the Family Courts have to take its course. 7. In the above view of the matter, the writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. We make it clear that we have expressed no opinion on the merits of the matter and that it is for the petitioner to take recourse to the remedies available under law and to take appropriate steps in accordance with law for securing of the children or for visitation rights. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE cp*