- (1.) THIS appeal is direct ed against an order of the District Judge of Bahraich passed on an application made by the respondent under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act for the returning of the custody of her ward, her minor son, then aged about 4 years.
(2.) THE parties to this litigation are Mahomedans, the appellant being the father and the respondent the mother of the minor. There has Been a divorce between them. The allegations in the application were that during the period they were in lawful wed lock the minor was born and though there has been a divorce since then he has been living with the mother. A few days prior to the making of the application by the respondent before the District Judge, it was alleged, the minor was taken away on some pretext by the father. It was in these cir cumstances that the application was made under Section 25 by the mother to the effect that it will be for the welfare of the ward, the minor, to be returned to the custody _ of his guardian, the mother. That application has been allowed. The father has come up in this appeal and challenges that order. Section 25 (1) of the Guardians and Wards Act provides: "25 (1) If a ward leaves or is remov ed from the custody of a guardian, of his person, the Court, if it is of opinion that it will be for the welfare of the ward to return to the custody of his guardian, may make an order for his return, and for the purpose of enforcing the order may cause the ward to be arrested and to be delivered into the custody of the guardian."
(3.) IN order to attract the applica tion of this provision of law there must be a ward or a minor. He must have left or been removed from the custody of the guardian of his person and it should be for the welfare of that minor to return him to the custody of the guardian. In these circumstances the court may make an order for his return.;