High Court of Gujarat
PATNI BHARATBHAI GOVINDBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 56-DISPOSED AT ADMISSION STAGE
Holding
The court held that, in the absence of any unlawful detention, the parties may resolve custody by mutual agreement and therefore the habeas corpus petition was disposed.
Summary
The petition was a special criminal application (habeas corpus) filed by Patni Bharatbhai Govindbhai seeking the production of his minor son, the corpus, who was in the custody of the maternal grandparents. The court, after hearing the parties, found that the dispute was trivial and could be resolved by a mutually agreed custody arrangement. The parties agreed that the father would have custody of the child on weekends, holidays and festivals, from morning to evening, and possibly overnight if the child was comfortable, while the grandparents would have the child the rest of the time. The court noted that the child was comfortable with the father and that the arrangement was subject to the child's comfort. Accordingly, the petitioner’s counsel chose not to press the writ further, reserving the right to approach another forum if needed. The writ petition was therefore disposed of without any order as to costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the father is entitled to custody of the minor child over the maternal grandparents
- Whether a habeas corpus petition is appropriate in a family custody dispute
- Whether the best interests of the child require judicial intervention or can be settled by mutual agreement
Subjects
custodychild welfarehabeas corpusfamily lawminorparental rightsgrandparents
Judgment
R/SCR.A/9350/2026 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (HABEAS CORPUS) NO. 9350 of
2026
==========================================================
PATNI BHARATBHAI GOVINDBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. BHAVNA D ACHARYA(6406) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
JUCKY LUCKY CHAN(8033) for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE UTKARSH THAKORBHAI
DESAI
Date : 28/07/2026
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN)
Captioned writ petition is filed with a request, seeking
direction to the respondents to produce the corpus – the minor son
as named in the prayer clause.
2. After issuance of the notice, the bench has interacted with the
petitioner on one hand and the respondent nos.3 and 4 on the
other, who happen to be the grandparents on maternal side. This
Court having interacted, could gather that there were trivial issues
raised or prevailing and therefore, the Court was of the opinion that
those issues can be thrashed out if the parties sit together. At one
point of time, it was agreed between the parties that the petitioner
shall take the custody of the child on weekends in the morning and
will drop at the grandparents home in the evening. The
Page 1 of 3
R/SCR.A/9350/2026 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2026
arrangement was also agreed to continue even on Sundays.
3. On 07.07.2026, this Court has passed the following order:-
“Ms.Bhavna Acharya, learned Advocate has made
submissions along the lines of the averments made in the
application. It is submitted that the petitioner-father is deprived of
his son inasmuch as, the respondent nos. 3 and 4- grandparents
have illegally kept the custody of the corpus. It is submitted that
they are not giving the custody of the child to the father and hence,
the captioned petition.
2. Advance copy was served upon the office of the learned Public
Prosecutor. Mr.Utkarsh Sharma, learned Additional public Prosecutor
has informed this Court that respondent nos. 3 and 4 together with
the corpus are present. Hence, the matter was taken up in chamber.
3. This Court has interacted with the parties and it appears that the
issue is trivial and it can be resolved. Hence, till the next date of
hearing it will be in the interest of all the parties that the father shall
have the custody of the child on Saturday and Sunday from morning
to evening or till the time the child is comfortable. To be precise, the
petitioner shall take the custody of the child on Saturday in the
morning around 10:00 a.m. and drop the child at the grandparent’s
house in the evening between 5:00-6:00 p.m. The same
arrangement to continue on Sunday as well. Needless to clarify that
this arrangement should be subject to the corpus being comfortable
with the father.
4. Mr. Jucky Lucky Chan, learned Advocate states that he has
received instructions to appear on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4
and he shall take appropriate instructions by the next date of
hearing.
5. List the matter on 16.07.2026.”
Followed was the order dated 16.07.2026, which reads
thus:-
“Apropos the order of this Court dated 07.07.2026, the
custody of the corpus was with the petitioner for limited days and
duration. We have been informed that the corpus was comfortable
staying with the petitioner. The following arrangement recorded in
paragraph 3 of the order dated 07.07.2026, be continued till the next
date of hearing.
“3. …… To be precise, the petitioner shall take the custody of the child
on Saturday in the morning around 10:00 a.m. and drop the child at
the grandparent’s house in the evening between 5:00-6:00 p.m. The
same arrangement to continue on Sunday as well. Needless to clarify
Page 2 of 3
R/SCR.A/9350/2026 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2026
that this arrangement should be subject to the corpus being
comfortable with the father.”
2. List the matter on 28.07.2026.”
4. Today, the petitioner, the corpus, so also the grandparents,
are present. The corpus is accompanied by his maternal aunt –
Champaben and it appears that the child is very close to her. The
petitioner has also agreed, without prejudice to his rights and
contentions, that he be allowed the custody of the child on
weekends, holidays and during festivals and whenever the
petitioner wishes to. The petitioner and the respondent have agreed
that the petitioner can have the custody on above days, preferably
from morning to evening and if the child is comfortable staying
during night hours, the petitioner shall retain it during night hours.
5. In view of the above and the parties having agreed to the
aforesaid arrangement, Ms Bhavna D. Acharya, learned advocate for
the petitioner, does not press the captioned writ petition at this
stage, reserving a liberty to take out appropriate proceedings before
appropriate forum in accordance with law.
6. The petition, is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. No order
as to costs.
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN,J)
(UTKARSH THAKORBHAI DESAI, J)
BINOY B PILLAI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges.
Digitally signed by: BINOY BALAKRISHNA PILLAI(HC00183), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 28/07/2026 14:36:25
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "custody"Sign in to search