1 wp52911 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 529 OF 2011 Kishor Bhojraj Katigar ...Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Ms. Shilpa A. Joshi for the Petitioner Mr. D.P. Adsule, A.P.P., for the State CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE: 28TH FEBRUARY, 2011 (in Chamber) P.C.:- This habeas corpus petition is filed by the father for production of his son, Vipul Kishor Katigar, who, according to him, had gone missing since 14th February, 2011. He registered missing complaint in the local police station in that behalf, and apprehended that respondent No. 3 must be responsible for that situation. On the basis of that information, the local police started search of the missing boy. They were able to track the location of respondent No. 3 on 2 wp52911 25th February, 2011. When it was realised that respondent No. 3 was in Solapur, the local police immediately rushed to Solapur and traced the boy as well as respondent No. 3 in the premises of Snehalay Sanstha, which is a charitable trust. The boy was, thereafter, brought to Mumbai on 26th February, 2011 and kept in a children’s home for being produced in Court today. Accordingly, the boy has been produced before us today. 2. Respondent No. 3 is appearing before us in person. According to her, she had to leave Mumbai at short notice to attend marriage at Solapur. She could not get in touch with the petitioner before leaving Mumbai. However, since, during the week-end, the custody of the son was with her, in terms of order dated 16th June, 2009 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 774 of 2009, she took her son along with her to Solapur. According to respondent No.3, she is a social worker, and was associated with the activities of the said Snehalay Sanstha. 3. It is not necessary for us to enter into any of these pleas taken either by the petitioner or respondent No. 3. For the time being, we would observe that the petitioner and respondent No. 3 are bound by the order passed by this Court on 16th June, 2009. The fact that 3 wp52911 respondent No.3 has committed breach of the conditions specified therein is a matter which will have to be agitated in appropriate proceedings. We express no opinion on merits in that behalf, and leave the parties to pursue their remedies before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law. All questions in that behalf are left open. 4. Respondent No. 3 undertakes that, in future, she will not embark on such adventure, and would abide by the conditions specified in order dated 16th June, 2009, until the same are modified in her favour. 5. Since the missing Vipul Kishor Katigar has been produced before us, coupled with the fact that the order dated 16th June, 2009 provides that his custody would remain with the petitioner-father between every Monday to Friday, his custody has been handed over to the petitioner, on clear understanding that the petitioner will have to abide by the order dated 16th June, 2009 in future, until the same is modified or vacated, as the case may be, by the concerned Court. 6. The petitioner undertakes to hand over access of the minor son to respondent No. 3 on fourth Saturday, as the school is closed on that date, as also the last school working day preceding the vacation, at or 4 wp52911 before 4.30 p.m. Once again, we make it clear that this undertaking is accepted, subject to further orders to be passed in the custody matter by the Family Court or modification of order dated 16th June, 2009 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 774 of 2009. 7. Respondent No. 5 shall ensure that she remains present at the time when the petitioner would be arriving with his minor son, to provide access to respondent No. 3. 8. Insofar as the present petition is concerned, as the relief is of habeas corpus for production of Vipul Kishor Katigar, the same is worked out. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with the above observations. A.R. JOSHI, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.