Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6079 (CAL)

RUMA MANDAL v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/4575/2026 · 2026-03-23

Saugata Bhattacharyya

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1. 1. (DL) (DL) 23.03.2026 23.03.2026 Ct. No. 05 (ARPAN) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. 4575 OF 2026 RUMA MANDAL VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS Mr. Indrajit Roy Chowdhury, Adv. …for the Petitioner Mr. Tanmoy Kumar Ghosh, Sr. G.A. Mr. Laxmi Narayan Banerjee, Adv. …for the State Mr. Laxmi Nath Bhattacharya, Adv. …for the Respondent no.4 1. Matter is heard in presence of the learned advocates representing the petitioner, State respondents and respondent no.4. 2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that a representation was made on 29th January, 2026 to the Officer-in-Charge, Joynagar Police Station, South 24 Parganas seeking steps to be taken by the police authorities and to make arrangement so that two daughters of the petitioner, who are presently staying with their father being respondent no.4, can stay with the petitioner. 3. Inspector-in-Charge, Joynagar Police Station has prepared a communication dated 16th March, 2026, which is placed before this Court through the learned advocate representing the State respondents and same is taken on record. 2 4. On perusal of the said communication dated 16th March, 2026, it appears that in the wedlock of the petitioner and respondent no.4 four daughters were born, out of which two are staying with the petitioner being mother and other daughters are staying with the respondent no.4 being father. 5. Petitioner is seeking custody of other two daughters who are staying with respondent no.4. If petitioner is interested to get custody of those two daughters who are staying with their father, petitioner is required to approach the appropriate forum; this is not the correct proceeding where petitioner can get custody of the daughters as it is found that both the daughters out of four are staying with respondent no.4. 6. Hence, Court is not inclined to interfere with the writ petition. 7. Writ petition stands dismissed. 8. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon usual undertakings. (SAUGATA BHATTACHARYYA, J.)