High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly are in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the 2nd Respondent in not granting custody of un-named Baby Girl, aged about 3 1l2 months in favour of petitioner who is Maternar Grand Father in deprivation of basic rights of the child by the 2nd Respondentandfailuretogivemedicationtothechildwhoissufferingwithsevere 7 health compraints of respiratory now in criticar condition and there is no proper care and response on beharf of respondent No.2, the petitioner is onry person to act as guardian for un-named Baby Girr, but without rooking in the paramount interest of the un-named Baby Girr werfare and denying the custody in favour of Petitioner is iflegar, arbitrary, discriminatory and without JUrisdiction and vioration of the fundamentar rights guaranteed under Articres 1g and 21 of the constitution of lndia and consequenry direct the 2nd Respondent to return of the chird in favour of Petitioner tiI Biotogical mother of un_named baby girl attain Va;orif ny completing 18 years. IA NO: 1 oF 2025 Petition under section 'r51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the 2nd Respondent to grant custody of the un-named Baby Girr, aged about 3 1/2 months in favour of petitioner til Biorogicar mother of Un-named Baby Girr attain Majority by completing .l B years. Counsel for the petitioner: SRI pALLE SRIHARINATH Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: Cp idnlirOr,,rer.f DEV & CHTLD counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: -- The Court made the following: ORDER WELFARE THE IIONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T. MADIIAVT DEVI WRIT PETITIO NNO.5 090 oF 2025 o RDEII. 'll.ris *'rit petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 ol the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action ol thc respondent No.Z in not granting custody of 'un-named Raby Girl' aged about 3% months in lavour of the petitioner' who is the rnaternal grandf-ather o1'the babv cl.rild and failure to give medication to the child. who is sr-rl-fcring with severe health complaints of respiratory system and not looking at the paramount interest of the un-named Baby Girl in lavour of the petitioner till the biological mother of the chitd attains the majority ol 18 years as iltegat and arbitrary and consecluently t-o givc thc custody of the child to the petitioner and to pass such other ordcr or orclers in the interest ofjustice' Br:icf facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are 2, that the pctitioner is the father and respondent No'5 his wife are the parents of respondent No'4 ln the ycar 2024' one Manda Prashanth had mken away the minor daughter of the petitioner from the custody of the petitioner bY saYing illusionary worcls and had sexual intercourse with 2 the minor daughter of the petitioner, due to which she conceived and gave birth to a female cl.rild on 26.10.2024 u,ith a sever.e health complaint o f the resplratory system and ttie chilcl had undergole medication and treatrncnl with Ankura Ilospital and Russh Hospital, Hyderabad, as an inpatient. .I.hc doctors opined that she requlres medication and treatment with sophisticated equlpntents. Since the mother was a mi,or, as per. the orders of thc Junior Ci'il Judge Co.rt at Dubbak, in DisNo.9612025, darecl 25.01.2025, the District Child Plotection Officer, Speciaiized Acloption Agency (SAA), Balasadanam, Murshadgadda, Sidclipet l.own and District, has taken custodv of the the petirioner. the chitd rs not getting proper medication and treatrnent and he is thercfcrre requesting the custody of the fernale chird to be gi'en to .irr to take care of the child ti, her mothel., i.e.. daughter of the petitioner altains the age of majority. The writ petition was filed on 1g.02.2025, The petitioner claims to be having affection towards the un_named Baby Girl and had sought his custody. The petitioner,s rvif'e i.e., respondent No.5 was in police custody while the minor daughter was under the custody of thc petitioner.,_ child. Acco ?,,/ /' 3 Learned Government Pleader for Women Development and 3. Child Wellare relied upon the averments in the counter afhdavit liled by thc lespondent No 2 and stated that the respondent No 4 was a tninor and a victim as per record in Crime No'195/2024' under Sections l66a' 376(3), 420, 120b,201, 338 r/w 109 IPC and Sec'5(iXi)0I) r/w 6 of POCSO, Section I9(l) r/u' 2l(1) oi POCSO Acr' 2012 and 75 of Jr,n'cnilc Justice Act and Sections 9 and l0 ol Child Marriage Act on the tllc o1- P.S.Miroddi. It is stated that tl.re respondent No'5 along with RMP Doctor Mr.Appanapalty Yellesham' sotd the baby to a childless couple of Sangareddy District and on coming to know about the same' a crime u,as registered against them and both the grandmother and the RMP doctor are in jail. It is stated that the custody of the child was given to the respondent No 2 as per the directions of the Court and her health conclition has becu levieu'cd by thc doctors and her health condition is now stated to be stablc' It is stated that after the delivery' the biological mother and other family members were not even willing to look at the baby, leave alone look after the welfare of the baby and therefore' the baby was placed in Shishu Gruha for care and protection and the child will be given for adoption as per the Adoption Regulations' 2022 ' lt \s 4 stated that the baby has been named as Mithakshi and that the stafr or Shishu Gruha and arso the croctor.s are monitoring alr the babies in the home and tl'rat baby Mithakshi is normal and her- healtrr condition is stable. She rel-erred to the Social Invesgig2li6n lleport given by the Social Worker in Forrn_22 to the efl-ecr that if the babl is given back to their family, tl.rcrc is evcry possibility ol her being given to illegal adoption, as the mother is a rninor and she does not know how to take care ,f the bab1', and financiary arso [hc1' arc poor. [-rrc-r.erore, according to the learned Government pleader lor Women Development and Child Welfare, the child camot be given to the care of the petitioner, who is a grandfather and also to the responde nts No.4 and 5.

4. Leamed counsel for the peritioner, however., retied upon the affidavit filed along with the implead pelition filecl to implead respondents No.4 and _5 kr subrnit that initialiv thc chilci rvas gir,en arr,,a_r, only on the ground that trre child rvas not bom out of wedlock and therefore they u,ere afraid that they would face social boycott, but now they have tarkecr to the fatrrer of thc chird and there is a marriage fixed between them and as sootl as their daughter attains the age of majority, i I i I I i I i .w"/. , 5 marriage wilt be perlbrmed and therefore' they are seeking custody of the baby so that the child can be loohed after by her natural parents' l{aving regard to the rival contentions and the material on 5. record, this Cour[ tlnds that admittedly the mother was a minor when shc had given birth to the baby girl on 26' 10'2024 Therefore' as per the proceedings No'195/CrlK/2025' dated 23'01'2025' the date of birth of thc tninot' mother is t2'03 2009 as recorded in her bonafide ceftificate' shc would bccomc a maj or by 1 2 03 2rJ27 and it is also stated that the marriage between the natutal parents of the child is hxed and would be performed after shc attained the age of majority ln these circumstances' it would bc in the best interest ol the child if the natural pareflts are given custody of the chiid lhe respondent authorities are' therefore' directed to verily the contentions of thc petitioner and the respondents No.4 and 5 and if it is lbund that the respondent No'4 is getting married to the natural father of the child after she attains the age of majority' only thcn the custody of the child may bc given to the natural parents with a constant and regular vigil as to the wellare of the child and with such conditions as the respondent No.2 may deem fit and proper to tn! lmpose in order to ensurei thc safcty' security and well-bein* , \ t 6 child. The respondent No.2 is, ther.efore, directed to conduct such necessarv inquiry rvithin a period ol two (2) months liorn the date of rcceipt or a copy or this order arrcl trrereaficr pass ap,roprirrrL. ordcfs thereon on the custody of the rninor bab,v girl. I ill such liilre, the respondenr No''l shall be alrowed visiting rights. She,ray visit the chird once a wcek and spend two hours ra,ith the child. Respondent author.ities shall also not initiate any steps for giving the cl,ril. i, adoption to anv third party till a decision is taken in this regard. 6' 'rhe writ Petition is accordingiy disposcd of. No order.as ro costs. 7. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if anv, in this Writ petition shall also stand closed SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL OE UTY REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// s - - * -" "SiJXilt'iled Adoption Agency (SAA) No. 12_4_5eti, B;i,;;;,ffi, n,r1"[ti"dioor, siddifer ror,i,n CTION OFFICER If-ll19.rprl P,"".r.t".rY Wpmen De_vetopment and Chrrd wetfare Department, becretanat at Hyderabad. State of TelanLrn, The District Chit-d prorectron Oni""r, Sfl.B SL;,i Child Welfare Committee Tgq OV its Chairperson. Office of the District Wetfare officer. Women chidr#. il;;Ei;;;S";ior Citizen Department. -D",ffi $:".%X'i$ !;?:iat One CC to SRt PALLE SRt Jl,/ecgliecpidt*-w"dilEfr T11l{dflilfi }El?lHPlmnncourtrorthe iH%JlffilrJna, at Hyderabro o ff i ce s d ; p r;* 'rou-ij''" vvr-Lr n d a pa k a M a n d a r J vir rl#l ? "i '1r. " To 1 2 3 4 5 6 PSK. BS w :rf*t?1f*ry.y-x.:,rn r HIGH COURT DATED:1010912025 ORDER WP.No.5090 of 2025 t I I ,,-: :l ..; .-r' /i't" / / ..,.. ' :'.i..r 1'.\.a !\ ' " tl':::' a$ j, '.:. t,.l! --\'.a \ "(.\ \\ ia \.,-,, \.'!..i ,. .. {:)-}.:r.,./ -:i .j _..-;-. i4 :4.\ 1. i i., r' .' .;:,.; ,t'| .:; t.' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS a