IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2011 / 7TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 305 of 2011(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ASWATHI.S, D/O.K.N.SOMAN, ASWATHI BHAVAN, CHERUVALLY P.O., MANIMALA (VIA), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 543. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SOHAN SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH PULIMOOTTIL SRI.K.DILIP SRI.ROVIN RODRIGUES RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ARVIND RATNAKAR, S/O.K.P.RATNAKARAN, `GOVARDHAN', HOLLOWAY ROAD, NEAR SANJOSE SCHOOL, THALASSERY P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 101. 2. K.P.RATNAKARAN, DO. DO. 3. SAMYUKTHA RATNAKARAN, DO. DO. 4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TELLICHERRY POLICE STATION, TELLICHERRY, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 101. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANNUR, PIN-670 001. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE R4, R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WP(CRL).305/11 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICTE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR, BIRTHS & DEATHS, KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY, DTD.15.3.2010. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CHILD NAMED RUDRA ARVIND. /TRUE COPY/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- W.P(Crl.).No.305 OF 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. 1.Following earlier orders, the child in question is now in the custody of the petitioner, the mother. It is an infant. 2.Read order dated 7.7.2011. 3.Having regard to the best interest of the affairs and welfare of the infant, we are of the firm view that as of now, the child has to continue to be in the custody of the mother. We, therefore, direct that the fact situation obtained regarding the custody of the child as per order dated 7.7.2011 will be maintained until further orders. 4.We see that there is a bunch of allegations against the first respondent in the writ petition. It is submitted that the first WPCR.305/11 2 respondent has filed counter affidavit though that is yet to come on board. We clarify that we have not looked into any of the allegations and counter allegations, though we have issued the aforesaid direction on the basis of the crucial fact that the child is an infant, aged only 7 months. With this, we further clarify that either among the parties, if so advised, may move the Family Court for custody orders, orders in relation to visitation rights etc. and nothing stated in this judgment will affect any such procedure. If any such application is filed, the Family Court will give expeditious consideration for that. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge. kkb.1/8.