Sign in

Raj HC grants custody of minor girl & daughter to man who recently turned adult

The division bench comprising Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni issued the ruling after considering the facts and circumstances of the case

Updated on: Jul 14, 2023, 16:46:28 IST
By
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The Rajasthan high court has granted the custody of a minor girl and her daughter to the man with whom the girl had eloped and married who recently turned 21.

The court announced the decision said the future of the minor girl and their daughter would otherwise be in jeopardy . (HT file image)
The court announced the decision said the future of the minor girl and their daughter would otherwise be in jeopardy . (HT file image)

The court announced the decision, saying the future of the minor girl and their daughter would otherwise be in jeopardy .

The division bench comprising Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice Rajendra Prakash Soni issued the ruling after considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

The case began with two Habeas Corpus petitions filed separately by Rajmal, the father of the minor girl, and Heera Lal, who is the father of the boy who recently turned adult.

Rajmal alleged that his minor daughter went missing on January 31, 2022, and despite lodging an FIR, the police had failed to locate her. Similarly, Heera Lal claimed that his minor son also went missing on the same date and the police did not properly investigate the missing person’s report .

Also Read: Infant seized from adoptive parents, reunited with biological mother after Rajasthan high court order

Eventually, the police managed to find both and presented them before the High Court on June 13, 2023.

During the proceedings on Thursday, it was revealed that the young man, Ramesh, became an adult on July 11. As per documentary evidence, the girl’s date of birth is May 7, 2007, meaning she is just over 16 years old now.

The court noted that Ramesh and the girl claimed to have left their homes willingly and had subsequently married. The couple now have a year-old daughter.

The petitioner, Heera Lal, Ramesh’s father, said he was no longer interested in having custody of his son.

On the other hand, Rajmal, accompanied by his wife, expressed their willingness to take custody of their daughter and granddaughter. However, they made it clear that they did not consider Ramesh as their son-in-law.

During the interaction in court, the girl said she wished to live with Ramesh , who is her husband, and wanted him to take care of their daughter. Ramesh, in turn, put on record his readiness to assume custody of both the girl and their child. He mentioned that he was working as a painter in Indore, Madhya Pradesh, earning approximately Rs. 15,000 per month.

The court observed that Ramesh was detained by the police in relation to an FIR filed by Rajmal, alleging that Ramesh had forcefully abducted his minor daughter. However, the court assessed the girl’s maturity and intelligence after questioning her, and said she is capable of making her own decisions.

Furthermore, it was noted that Heera Lal, Ramesh’s father, was not willing to accept the girl as his daughter-in-law, and Rajmal, the girl’s father, did not wish to accept Ramesh as his son-in-law.

This predicament created an uncertain future for the girl and her daughter.

The court examined the case diary and found that the girl had given statements under Sections 161 and 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, wherein she had explicitly stated that she went with Ramesh willingly, and without being pressured. Ramesh and the girl confirmed in court that they had married and had the child together.

Considering the circumstances, the court, expressing concern, said if the girl was handed over to her parents, they might marry her off to someone else from their community. This outcome would leave the future of the one-year-old child uncertain, the court said.

Taking into account the girl’s happiness and the security of her and her daughter’s future, the court decided that she would be better off in the company of Ramesh.

However, since Ramesh was still detained because of the case against him, the court quashed the case.

Based on this evidence, the court said that no offence had been made out against Ramesh, and it would be difficult for the prosecution to prove the charges if the trial were to proceed. Consequently, the court deemed it appropriate to hand over custody of the girl, and the child, to Ramesh.

In its order, the court directed the authorities to release the girl and Ramesh from Balika Grah and Juvenile Home, respectively, and hand over custody of the girl to Ramesh.