Kerala High Court
Lekha K.B vs The State Of Kerala on 5 August, 2021
Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15643 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
LEKHA K.B.
AGED 42 YEARS
D/O.KALLYANI, KOLLAIKODU HOUSE,
BHOOTHAMKARA, ELAMANNOOR.P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY ADV BIJU .C. ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
HOME DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE,
VAYALATHALA.P.O, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
VANITHA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.
4 THOMAS DAVID,
S/O.DAVID, MANOJ BHAVAN, ANANDAPALLY.P.O,
ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.
W.P.(C) No.15643 of 2021 2
5 P.S.DAVID,
W/O.DAVID, MANOJ BHAVAN, ANANDAPALLY.PO,
ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.
6 ELIZABETH, W/O.DAVID,
MANOJ BHAVAN, ANANDAPALLY.P.O,
ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA
BY SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.15643 of 2021 3
W.P.(C)No.15643 of 2021
-----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
The fourth respondent is the husband of the petitioner. Petitioner and the fourth respondent are at loggerheads and living separately. It is alleged by the petitioner that the fourth respondent has taken custody of the two female children born to the petitioner in the said wedlock, without her consent. Aggrieved by the said conduct of the fourth respondent, the petitioner approached the Child Welfare Committee, the second respondent, and in terms of the order passed by the second respondent, the custody of the children was initially given to the petitioner and later, to the fourth respondent. According to the petitioner, the decision of the second respondent in giving custody of the children to the W.P.(C) No.15643 of 2021 4 fourth respondent is vitiated, as it was done without ascertaining the wishes of the children and without having regard to the welfare of the children. It is the case of the petitioner that the children being female, the Child Welfare Committee ought not have given their custody to the fourth respondent. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions to the second respondent to consider Ext.P4 request made by the children.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.
3. The dispute between parents as to the custody of their children are to be dealt with in terms of the provisions contained in the Guardian and Wards Act by the Family Court concerned and not by the Child Welfare Committee constituted under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
In the said view of the matter, the writ petition is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to W.P.(C) No.15643 of 2021 5 approach the Family Court seeking relief in respect of the custody of the children.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE rkj W.P.(C) No.15643 of 2021 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15643/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30/06/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 30/06/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16/7/2021 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 26/7/2021.