Allahabad High Court
Km. Aanya (Minor) Throu.Her Mother ... vs State Of U.P.Throu.Prin.Secy.Home ... on 12 July, 2019
Bench: Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, Jaspreet Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 284 of 2019 Appellant :- Km. Aanya (Minor) Throu.Her Mother Smt.Shikha Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P.Throu.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Ors. Counsel for Appellant :- Neeraj Kumar Saxena,Arvind Kumar Shukla,Gaurav Saxena,Ketki Saxena,Lalla Chauhan,Rishi Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Gyan Singh Chauhan Hon'ble Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal,J.
Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.
Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent no.5 by Shri Gyan Singh Chauhan is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Gyan Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and Ms. Smiriti Sahay, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4.
This special appeal has been filed beyond nine days.
On due consideration, reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay are satisfactory.
Accordingly, application for condonation of delay (C.M. Application 78225 of 2019) is allowed.
Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
Appellant, who is mother of corpus, namely, Km. Aanya (minor), had filed Habeas Corpus No. 4873 of 2018 : Km. Aanya (Minor) Thru. Mother Smt. Shiksha Gupta vs. State of U.P. and 4 others, for illegal detention of her daughter/corpus (Km. Aanya). The Writ Court, after appreciating each and every document as well as arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties, disposed of the writ petition vide judgment and order dated 2.5.2019 with the following directions :
"(I) The petitioner (Smt. Shikha Gupta) is granted visiting rights to meet her daughter, who is presently residing with the opposite party No.5. The meeting of the petitioner with her daughter (corpus) would be at the Office of the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Lucknow during office hours i.e. 10:00 am. to 4:00 pm for two hours on a day and time agreed into by the parties or as directed by the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Lucknow, on any day preferably Saturday or Sunday, once in a month.
(II) During meeting hours, the petitioner would be free to give any kind of gifts to her daughter of her choice and liking and the same would not be objected to by the opposite party No.5. However,the petitioner will not take the corpus with her anywhere beyond the boundaries of the Office of Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Lucknow. Such meeting will be held in a secured atmosphere and it shall be the duty of the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Lucknow to provide cordial atmosphere and security to the parties.
28. This order shall not preclude the parties to claim the regular custody of the corpus before appropriate Court by initiating appropriate proceedings."
It appears that while passing the aforesaid impugned order, the Writ Court has recorded specific finding of fact in paragraphs 21 and 22, which reads as under :
"21. The corpus Km. Aanya is admitted to be of the age of about five years now. For the last one and half year, she is living with opposite party No.5. The corpus was summoned in the Court and it is noticed by this Court and recorded vide order dated 06.12.2018 that the corpus has shown no inclination to move towards her mother (Petitioner). The Court also goes on to record that, the custody of the children (including one who is in the custody of the mother), could not be disturbed. Therefore, keeping in view the behaviour of the corpus during her interaction, the Court recorded in order dated 06.12.2018 that, child shows no inclination towards her mother, her custody with her father/opposite party No.5 could not be disturbed.
22. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances, I am also of the considered view that, it will be not in the interest of the corpus (minor) to change her custody from her father/opposite party No.5 to her mother (petitioner), particularly, when the corpus has shown no inclination towards her mother (Petitioner)."
On due consideration of the aforesaid reasoning and directions of the Writ Court as well as protection given to the appellant viz. visiting rights etc., we are of the view that no case is made out to interfere in the impugned order.
The special appeal lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Jaspreet Singh, J.) (Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, J.) Order Date :- 12.7.2019 Ajit/-