- (1.) THE petitioner, who is the father of Km. Khushi Singhal, who is now aged about more than 11 years and Master Parth Singhal, who is now aged about 8 years, has filed this habeas corpus writ petition seeking custody of his both children who are at present in the custody of their mother, the respondent no. 3.
(2.) THIS Court vide order dated 11.4.2014 issued notices upon the respondents no. 3 and 4 with the directions to file their respective counter affidavits by the next date of listing i.e. 8.5.2014. Despite personal service of the notices, none of the respondents have filed their counter affidavits. Sri Vivek Kumar Singh and Sri Mayank Yadav, Advocates have filed their powers on 5.5.2014 for the respondent no. 3 but no counter affidavit has been filed. Sri Vikek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 is present in Court but he simply stated that his client is not willing to file her counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, insisted to hear and dispose of this writ petition finally.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record. The petitioner is a successful businessman but it appears that he is unsuccessful in his marital life. The facts on record reveal that marriage between the petitioner and the respondent no. 3, namely, Smt. Deepti Singhal, was solemnized on 29.6.2001 and out of the wedlock, a daughter, Km. Khushi Singhal was born on 24.4.2003 and a son Parth Singhal was born on 27.11.2006. It would appear that the father of respondent no. 3 has been running a private educational institute. It is alleged by the petitioner that he on persuasion of his wife invested some money in the educational institution run by the father of the respondent no. 3. It appears that the business relationship between the two families is the genesis of estranged relations erupt between the husband and the wife. The matrimonial skirmishes between the husband and the wife had ultimately culminated into separation and filing of criminal cases against each other. Due to tense atmosphere of the family, the petitioner got admitted his daughter Km. Khushi Singhal in Doon Girls School, Dehradoon and she was staying there in the boarding of the school. It is the petitioner, who is paying the entire expenditure incurred on her education including boarding charges etc. On 8.3.2014, it is alleged that there was again some skirmishes between husband and wife and on 9.3.2014 the wife left her matrimonial house along with the minor son for her parental home at Meerut. She filed a case under Section 498A I.P.C. against the petitioner. It is also argued that the respondent no. 3 had also removed all the jewelleries from the locker in Punjab National Bank at Ghaziabad. It is further alleged that the petitioner has made every effort to convince and console the respondent no. 3 to join the conjugal relationship but she refused to permit the petitioner even to meet his son Parth Singhal. The respondent no. 4, the Principal of Doon Girls School did not permit the petitioner to meet his daughter Km. Khushi Singhal when he arrived school to meet her on 11.3.2014 on the pretext that the mother of the girl, the respondent no. 3, has instructed not to allow the petitioner to meet his daughter. The petitioner accordingly moved this habeas corpus writ petition seeking custody of his children mainly on the ground that the petitioner is not only the natural guardian of both the minors being their father but also that his wife, the respondent no. 3, having no independent source of income to maintain them, she is unable to maintain and take care of the welfare of the children which is paramount consideration while deciding the custody.;