1 161211 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY vgm CRIMINAL APELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1612 OF 2011 Shailesh Vinayak Shrikhande ...Petitioner V/s. Dorothee Hartenstein & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Hamed Kadiani with Mr. Aditya Jalan i/by M/s. ALMT Legal for the Petitioner Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, A.P.P., for the State CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND R.G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE: DECEMBER 21, 2011 P.C.:- Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. 2. This petition is for issuing direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to ensure production of three minor children – Josephine, Arjun and Benjamin - before this Court; and give them in custody of the petitioner so as to allow the petitioner to have custody of his children. 2 161211 3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has already instituted proceedings before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai, for custody of the three children, referred to above. The said proceedings are still pending. The petitioner has approached this Court, as no order is being passed in the said proceedings, including any interim direction, on the specious ground that the respondent-wife is not appearing before the Court. According to the petitioner, the respondent-wife has been duly served in the said proceedings, but she has chosen not to appear or produce the children before the Family Court. In that case, it is open to the petitioner to persuade the Family Court to proceed ex parte against the said respondent-wife; but cannot directly approach this Court for a Writ of Habeas Corpus for production of his children. 4. In our opinion, the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to pursue the custody proceedings before the family Court, and take them to their logical end. The Family Court is competent to consider the petitioner’s request for grant of interim relief during the pendency of the main matter. The argument of the petitioner about paramount interest of the children can be conveniently addressed in the said proceedings. 3 161211 5. As a result, we dispose of this petition, with liberty to the petitioner to pursue remedy before the Family Court. 6. We hope and trust that the Family Court will dispose of the main proceedings expeditiously, or, in case it is not possible to dispose of the main custody proceedings pending before the Family Court, the said Court may consider prayer for interim relief, if any, which will have to be decided in accordance with law. All questions are left open. R.G. KETKAR, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.