$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1877/2026 ANURAG GARG .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pranav Sharma, Adv. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. Insp. Gaurav Kumar, PS: Kishan Garh. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA O R D E R % 03.07.2026 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’), seeking issuance of a Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce Master XX, the minor child of the petitioner, who is stated to be presently residing with the respondent no.4, wife of the petitioner and the mother of Master XX. 2. Issue notice. 3. Notice is accepted by Mr. Sanjay Lao, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 3. He has handed over a Status This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2026 at 11:29:56 Report dated 02.07.2026. The same is taken on record. 4. The petition itself discloses that before filing the present Writ Petition, the petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 100 of BNSS, seeking a similar relief. The said complaint was disposed of by the learned JMFC-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, vide order dated 25.05.2026. The learned Judge had interacted with the respondent no.4, who had appeared virtually in the said proceedings along with her son and stated that she is currently residing with her maternal uncle at Jaipur and does not wish to return to the house of the petitioner. She had also stated that she had left the matrimonial home with her son due to matrimonial disputes with the petitioner herein. Satisfied with the same, the learned Judge had disposed of the said complaint. 5. We fail to understand as to why the petitioner, instead of approaching the concerned Family Court for the appropriate relief, has now filed the present petition for the same. The purpose of a writ of Habeas Corpus is not for settling the matrimonial, custodial or guardianship disputes between the warring parties. 6. The Writ Petition is therefore disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail of his remedies in accordance with the law. NAVIN CHAWLA, J RAVINDER DUDEJA, J JULY 3, 2026/Arya/nj/as This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2026 at 11:29:56