- (1.) The respondents in a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus are in appeal and challenge the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge on 22 August 2016 in terms of which the writ petition came to be allowed and the appellants herein were directed to hand over the custody of the corpus to the petitioner who stands arrayed as the fourth respondent herein.
(2.) The habeas corpus petition itself was in respect of a claim by the fourth respondent to obtain custody of the respondent No. 5, a minor girl child aged two, his daughter. The facts on which there is not must dispute are as follows.
(3.) The fourth respondent was married to the daughter of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 on 24 February 2011. During her pregnancy, the wife is said to have moved to the house of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 where while giving birth to the fifth respondent she is stated to have died on 7 March 2014. Since the time of the death of the wife, the minor child has remained in the custody and care of the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 [the grandparents] and the appellant No. 3, the brother of the deceased who is also married. The fourth respondent is stated to have subsequently married one Shilpi Singh on 26 May 2015. Prior to the filing of the writ petition, the fourth respondent also filed a petition under Section 266 of the Indian Succession Act praying for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of properties stated to be present in a locker standing in the name of the deceased. In the said proceedings, the fourth respondent on 16 March 2016 is stated to have filed an amendment application for impleadment of the minor child pursuant to an order of the concerned Court dated 3 February 2016. The learned Single Judge while proceeding to decide the writ petition posed the following question for consideration : "The only point that is to be seen in the present petition whether petitioner no. 2 can be held disentitle for the custody of the corpus on the basis of remarriage." ;