Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 23rd July, 2024
MAYA KUMARI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. R.C Bhargav, Mr. H.S Bhargav, Ms. Swarnika Bhargav, Mr. Lokesh Kumar Mishra, Mr. Sumit Kumar, Mr. Himanshu Sharma & Mr. Haider Khan, Advs.
(M: 9958757473)
Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.)
Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya, Advs.
Rajesh Chauhan PS Jait Pur.
Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Adv.
(M: 8395906611)
Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral)
JUDGMENT
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present writ petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner- Ms. Maya Kumari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioner vide the present petition is seeking issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus thereby directing the Respondents to produce the minor child, Master ‘X’ 15:59 before this Court. Further, vide the present petition, the Petitioner is seeking interim custody of the child-Master ‘X’.
3. It is stated in the petition that the Petitioner was married to the Respondent No. 2- Mr. Sachin Awana, on 21st July, 2018. Further, from the said wedlock, the Petitioner had two children. Master ‘X’ is the eldest child, who was born on 13th June, 2019.
4. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 coerced her out of the matrimonial home i.e. H. No. 32 School Road, Shri colony, Meethapur Extension, Badarpur, Delhi and forcibly took custody of Master ‘X’.
5. When the writ petition was listed on 30th May, 2024, the Court had directed Respondent no. 2- the husband of the petitioner to be present in Court on the next date of hearing with his child. On 3rd July, 2024, Respondent NO. 2 had appeared before the Court along with the child, i.e., Master ‘X’. After interacting with the parties, the Court noted as under:
15:59
11. The Court has observed that there are some proceedings which have been filed by Ms. Sonam Awana against Mr Sachin Awana. The same are stated to be domestic violence proceedings, criminal complaint of bigamy as also a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The said proceedings are currently pending and ld. Counsel for Mr. Sachin Awana has informed the Court that in the case of bigamy, charge sheet has also been framed.
12. Under such circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to direct issuance of notice to Ms. Sonam Awana, who is stated to be the first wife of Mr. Sachin Awana. Ms. Sonam Awana shall be impleaded as Respondent No. 7 in the present petition. Ld. Counsel for Mr. Sachin Awan shall furnish the address and mobile number of Ms. Sonam Awana. Let the notice be served upon the Respondent No. 7-Ms. Sonam Awana on her mobile number by the Registry through whatsapp as also through the concerned SHO.”
6. The Court had also put in place an arrangement so that the Petitioner may meet the child-Master ‘X’ in the Mediation Centre of the Delhi High Court. The same was directed in the following terms.
15:59 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. except on Sunday.
15. The interaction between the Petitioner and the child shall be in the absence of the father who can wait outside. The Mediation Centre shall ensure that the mother and the child meet in a cordial and an amicable atmosphere. Further, the Mediation Centre shall place a report of the interactions between the mother and the child which have taken place, by the next date of hearing. The Petitioner is permitted to bring her younger child for the interaction with Master X.”
7. Further, directions were issued for filing of the Status Report and Respondent no. 2-Mr. Sachin Awana was also directed to file an affidavit placing on record all the relevant documents as also any orders passed by the concerned Courts where proceedings were stated to be pending against him.
8. The matter was again taken up on 12th July, 2024 when the Mediation Centre of the Delhi High Court had reported that regular meetings were held between the mother and the child, i.e., Master ‘X’. The second child was also present in the Mediation Centre during the aforesaid meetings. The arrangement of the Petitioner’s meeting with the elder child, i.e., Master ‘X’ was again continued as per order dated 12th July, 2024, i.e., from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on a daily basis except on Sunday. Mrs. Sonam Awana, the first wife of the Respondent No. 2 was also present on that day and she was impleaded as Respondent No.7 in the present petition.
9. The matter has been taken up today. Today, there are two reports, which have been received by this Court. One is the report dated 11th July 2024 of the Meditation Centre of the Delhi High Court, and second is the status report dated 23rd July, 2024 along with a verification report of school details of 15:59 Master ‘X’, filed by the Standing Counsel under the signatures of the SHO/SI PS Jaitpur. As per the status report dated 23rd July, 2024 authored by Insp. Sanjiv Mishra, the SHO PS Jaitpur, Master ‘X’ is currently living in Faridabad and is also studying in Delhi Scholars International School, Sector-88, Greater Faridabad. The Status Report dated 10th July, 2024 authored by Insp. Sanjiv Mishra, the SHO PS Jaitpur also states that the FIR no. 19/2024 under Sections 498A/406/323/341/376/511/504/509/34 IPC has been lodged by the Petitioner against Respondent No. 2- Mr. Sachin Awana in PS Bharatpur, Rajasthan, in which the investigation is underway.
10. There are various proceedings, which are pending against Respondent No. 2, i.e., the husband of the Petitioner filed by Respondent no. 7- Mrs. Sonam Awana, his first wife.
11. The Mediation Centre has reported that the child is not yet familiar with the Petitioner, i.e., his mother, but the meetings did take place on six dates before the Mediation Centre.
12. The Court has heard ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and Ms. Geeta Luthra, Ld. Senior counsel appearing for the husband of the Petitioner - Respondent No.2.
13. Clearly, there are proceedings pending against the husband- Respondent No. 2 filed both by the first wife Mrs. Sonam Awana (Respondent no. 7) and the Petitioner herein.
14. The husband does not dispute the fact that Master ‘X’, who is in his custody, is the child of the Petitioner. The present being a habeas corpus petition, since the child is living with the father, the Court is of the opinion that the child’s schooling and the present habitat ought not to be disturbed at this stage. 15:59
15. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to put in place an interim arrangement permitting the Petitioner to visit the child/Master ‘X’ every weekend i.e., on Saturday and on Sunday. To begin with, the Petitioner may meet the child in the Delhi High Court Mediation Centre whenever the Centre is open on Saturdays from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. On Sundays and on days when the Mediation Centre is not opened, Respondent No. 2, i.e., the husband of the Petitioner shall either permit the Petitioner to visit the child and be with the child at his residence in Faridabad or facilitate the Petitioner to meet the child at a mutually agreed convenient location, where the Petitioner may spend time with both her children from 11:00 am till 5:00 pm. The husband can be in the vicinity but shall not interfere in the company of the Petitioner and the children.
16. The parties are free to avail of their remedies including under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 in accordance with law.
17. This arrangement shall continue till any further arrangement is put in place by a Court of competent jurisdiction.
18. The present habeas corpus petition is disposed of in these terms.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE AMIT SHARMA JUDGE JULY 23, 2024/dk/bh/Pc 15:59