Karnataka High Court
Mrs. Srilakshmi Narayanaswamy vs State Of Karnataka on 10 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:20475
WP No. 21337 of 2021
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 21337 OF 2021 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MRS. SRILAKSHMI NARAYANASWAMY,
W/O MR. NAGAVARMA PRAGBHU A,
D/O NARAYANASWAMY N K,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT
NO.159, 3RD CROSS,
RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR,
4TH BLOCK, NANDINI LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 096.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. N GOWTHAM RAGHUNATH.,ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
SUVARNA T
Location:
AND:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
VIDHAN SOUDHA,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
2. CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE - 3,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BENGALURU URBAN,
HOMBEGOWDA NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 029.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:20475
WP No. 21337 of 2021
HC-KAR
3. MR. NAGAVARMA PRABHU A,
S/O LATE GOPALAKRISHNA ANANTHAN,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT FLAT NO.207, ARJUN AURA APARTMENT,
97/4, 5TH CROSS,
BILEKAHALLI - 560 076.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MAHANTESH SHETTAR.,AGA FOR R1 & R2;
SMT.RENUKA C M., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. S SIDDAPPAJI., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR
RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING
ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE R2 COMMITTEE U/S 90 OF THE
JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILD) ACT,
2015 IN RESPECT OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE R3-
HUSBAN AGAINST THE PETITIONER-WIFE WHEREIN THE
MINOR DAUGHTER ANVITA PRABHU IS THE SUBJECT MATTER
OF THE COMPLAINT VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE
R2 COMMITTEE U/S 90 OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND
PROTECTION OF CHILD) ACT, 2015 IN RESPECT OF THE
COMPLAINT FILED BY THE R3 - HUSBAND AGAINST THE
PETITIONER - WIFE WHEREIN THE MINOR DAUGHTER ANVITA
PRABHU IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT VIDE
ANNEXURE-A
THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:20475
WP No. 21337 of 2021
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
"Wherefore, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant the following relief/s:
i. Call for records pertaining to the proceedings pending adjudication before the 2nd respondent committee Under Section 90 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Child) Act, 2015 in respect of the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent-husband against the petitioner-wife wherein the minor daughter Anvita Prabhu is the subject matter of the complaint vide Annexure-A. ii. Issue a writ of certiorari by quashing the entire proceedings pending adjudication before the 2nd respondent committee under Section 90 of the Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Child) Act, 2015 in respect of the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent - husband against the petitioner - wife wherein the minor daughter Anvita Prabhu is the subject matter of the complaint vide Annexure-A. iii. Pass any other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, proper, necessary and expedient in the circumstance of the case."
2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner and the respondent No.3 are the wife and husband. In view of their differences between the parties, they have filed M.C.No.3274/2019 seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty, -4- NC: 2026:KHC:20475 WP No. 21337 of 2021 HC-KAR which is pending before the I Additional Family Judge, Bangalore. Both of them have adopted the child by way of an adoption deed dated 29.12.2014. In the light of these disputes, both the parties have filed the G & W.C petitions before the Family Court. It is the case of the petitioner that the G& W.C petition filed by the respondent seeking custody was dismissed for non-prosecution and it was not restored so far. Whereas, petition filed by the petitioner-mother is pending consideration. While this being so, the petitioner has received impugned notice to appear before the child welfare committee dated 04.11.2021. Questioning the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Child Welfare Committee has no jurisdiction to issue a show-cause notice to the petitioner to appear. It is submitted that the dispute with regard to the custody is pending before the Family Court in G&WC case. When the matter is seized off by the competent Court and when the rights can be decided only by the Family Court which is hearing the G&WC matter, the Child Welfare Committee has no -5- NC: 2026:KHC:20475 WP No. 21337 of 2021 HC-KAR jurisdiction to issue such notice. It is submitted that if the third respondent has any apprehension with regard to the safety and otherwise of the child, the same can be brought to the notice of the Family Court where the G&WC petition is pending, as well as the MC petition is pending. It is submitted that the Child Welfare Committee has no jurisdiction. He has relied on paragraph No.10 in the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Mrs. Nidhi Luharuwalla Vs State of Karnataka arising out of Writ Petition No.1372/2019(GM- RES).
"10..........................................................
136. The Committee cannot be permitted usurp the jurisdiction of the competent Court exercising powers under the provisions of the Guardians Act. Admittedly, the proceeding under the Guardians Act is pending where the issue with regard to the custody of the minor is pending adjudication. In the instant case, the Committee, on the basis of the communication sent by the child to the Committee, has taken the custody from the petitioner and has handed over the custody of the child to respondent No.3. Under the provisions of the Guardians Act, the Court is empowered to make an order under Section 7 of the aforesaid Act. The said 14 jurisdiction conferred by law cannot be taken away by the Committee which is a statutory body. In the fact situation of the case, even if the Committee was of the opinion that the child was in need of care and protection, it ought to -6- NC: 2026:KHC:20475 WP No. 21337 of 2021 HC-KAR have referred the matter for consideration before the Family Court where the issue with regard to the custody of the minor was pending consideration. The usurpation of jurisdiction by the Committee in a matter which is sub-judice before the Court of competent jurisdiction under the Guardians Act cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The impugned order passed by the Committee dated 03.01.2019 is quashed and set aside. It is pertinent to mention here that even in the absence of any order with regard to the custody to respondent No.3, the petitioner in good faith had handed over the custody of the child to the respondent No.3. However, respondent No.3 on expiry of the vacation ought to have handed over the custody of the minor to the petitioner. However, apparently at the instance of respondent No.3, the minor child has 15 made a complaint to the Committee and thereupon the impugned order has been passed which has already been quashed by this Court. Therefore, the respondent No.3 is directed to handover the custody of the minor namely Dev to the petitioner who is the mother of the child and with whom the minor child was residing prior to 21.12.2018 on or before 11.02.2019 before the Family Court. Sofar as submission made by learned counsel for respondent No.3 that this Court should interview the child and take a decision is concerned, suffice it to say that since the Family Court is in the seisin of the matter, therefore, it is not necessary for this Court to interview the child as the scope of the present proceeding is confined to examination of the order passed by the Committee. The Family Court is directed to decide the issue of custody of the minor child expeditiously preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today. Needless to state that the parties 16 shall co-operate with the Family Court for early decision of the proceeding."-7-
NC: 2026:KHC:20475 WP No. 21337 of 2021 HC-KAR And he has also relied on Section 56(3) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short 'JJ Act'), and submits that the committee has no jurisdiction, particularly with regard to the cases where the child is adopted under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. It is submitted that on all counts the Child Welfare Committee has no jurisdiction.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the third respondent submits that considering the difficulties that are faced by the child and in the interest of the child, a complaint is given to the Child Welfare Committee and the notice is issued, the petitioner ought to have appeared before the committee and he cannot come before this Court.
5. Learned AGA appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and 2 submits that when show-cause notice is issued, if the Child Welfare Committee has no jurisdiction, the same could have been stated before the Committee by appearing before the same. It is submitted that the writ petition is a premature writ petition and the same is not maintainable. In response to the same, learned counsel for petitioner submits that in fact he has appeared and filed his objections. He has -8- NC: 2026:KHC:20475 WP No. 21337 of 2021 HC-KAR submitted that entertaining the complaint is a pure abuse of process and contrary to the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act.
6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. Admittedly, the child is adopted by the petitioner and the third respondent. Matrimonial disputes between the parties are pending. As well the petition that is filed seeking custody of the child is also pending before the family Court. The third respondent if at all had any grievance with regard to any of the conduct of the petitioner, he should have brought it to the notice of the Court in the pending G &WC petitions and instead of doing so he has gone before the Child Welfare Committee. The Child Welfare Committee is constituted under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 for short JJ Act.
7. Section 27 of the JJ Act deals with constitution of the Child Welfare Committee and Section 30 of the JJ Act deals with the functions and responsibilities of the Committee. The dispute that arose between the parties would not fall under any of the functions and responsibilities of the Committee as per -9- NC: 2026:KHC:20475 WP No. 21337 of 2021 HC-KAR Section 30 of the JJ Act. Then coming to Section 56 of JJ Act deals with adoption and particularly Section 56(3) of JJ Act states that nothing in this Act shall apply to the adoption of children made under the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act,1956.
8. A base perusal of above provisions makes it clear that the notice that is issued by the second respondent is without any jurisdiction and the second respondent cannot interfere with these kinds of matters where the disputes are pending before the competent Family Court. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following:
ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed by setting aside show-
cause notice dated 04.11.2021 issued by the second respondent.
ii. All pending I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE PKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1