Writ of Habeas Corpus is maintainable for child custody despite availability of alternative statutory remedies.

The appellant (mother) filed a Habeas Corpus petition for the custody of her minor son, Vishwajeet, born on August 13, 2024

She alleged that the child was forcibly taken by the father (Respondent No. 6) following matrimonial disputes

Despite an order dated September 10, 2025, by the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) directing the father to return the child, no compliance was made

A learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on November 6, 2025, holding that the father's custody was not "illegal" and that the mother should seek remedy under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890

The mother appealed this dismissal via the present Special Appeal.

1. Whether a writ of Habeas Corpus is maintainable for the custody of a minor child when an alternative remedy exists under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890?

2. Whether the custody of a minor child with one parent can be considered "illegal" or "improper" warranting the issuance of a high prerogative writ?

The Court relied on the principle that the "welfare of the child" is the paramount consideration in custody matters

extraordinary writ jurisdiction can be invoked for the best interest of the child even if the child is with another parent [Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan]

technical objections regarding alternative remedies under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, or the fact that a parent has natural guardianship, do not bar the maintainability of a Habeas Corpus petition [Gohar Begum v. Suggi and Tejaswini Gaud v. Shekhar Jagdish Prasad Tewari]

The Court observed that the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the petition on the ground of alternative remedy

It reasoned that modern jurisprudence has shifted away from narrow interpretations of "illegal detention" in parental contests; instead, the Court must exercise its parens patriae jurisdiction to ensure the child is placed in "proper custody"

The Bench noted that the minor was only 15-20 months old—a tender age where the mother's care is typically vital

the Court highlighted the respondent's non-compliance with the CWC order and the potential misuse of his position as a police constable to evade legal directions

By applying the Yashita Sahu doctrine, the Court held that a writ court is indeed an appropriate forum to determine custody based on the child's best interests, regardless of other statutory remedies

The Court allowed the Special Appeal and set aside the order dated November 6, 2025

The Court restored Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 931 of 2025 to its original status and directed it to be listed before the appropriate Bench on April 16, 2026, for a determination on merits regarding the welfare and custody of the minor