Criminal Writ Petition No. 2298 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2298 of 2010 Date of Decision: 1.2.2011 Tarsem Singh and Others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Ramandeep Singh Pandher, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. B.S. Sra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for respondents No.1 to 3. Mr. R.K. Shukla, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 6. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus, for release of detenue, namely Navpreet Kaur, daughter of petitioner No.1 and grand daughter of petitioners No.2 and 3, who is stated to be in custody of respondents No.4 to 6. Navpreeet Kaur was born on 27.7.2007. Her Mother Jaswinder Kaur died on 14.7.2010. In support of this, Death Certificate (Annexure P2) has been annexed with the present writ petition. It is stated that custody of the daughter of petitioner No.1 is with her maternal grand parents. It is contended that in second week of Criminal Writ Petition No. 2298 of 2010 2 September 2010, they had forcibly taken away Navpreet Kaur. Whether Navpreet Kaur was forcibly taken away by her maternal grand parents or her custody was entrusted by her mother Jaswinder Kaur to her parents, is a disputed question of fact. It is a case of the petitioners that Jaswinder Kaur had died in her parental house. Furthermore, where the interest of child will be secure is also a disputed question of fact which requires evidence to be led by the parties. The welfare of child is a paramount consideration. On touchstone of this, it is to be determined on the basis of evidence, as to whom custody of the child should be entrusted. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.1 being a father and natural guardian of Navpreet Kau will approach the appropriate Court, established under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, to seek her custody. The petitioners, if so advised, may approach the Court of competent jurisdiction, to seek custody of the child as this writ Court will be hesitant to determine the disputed questions of fact. In case, the petitioners approach the Court of competent jurisdiction, within a period of one month, the concerned Court shall decide the issue of custody of child, within a period of three months thereafter. With the observations made above, the present writ petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge February 1, 2011 “DK”