Read Time: 05 minutes

A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana, also comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and Hima Kohli on Thursday interacted with the children of an estranged couple, using the “break out session option in the virtual court” to ascertain the maintainability of a Habeas Corpus petition filed by their mother.

The petitioner who is the mother of two children, an American citizen, had filed a Habeas Corpus Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court against her husband, who is residing in India. She sought custody of her children currently under custody of their father on the strength of an order of a competent court of the United States, rendering the custody of the children to the husband as illegal.

She further sought shared custody, despite the matrimonial proceedings being pending before the Family Court in Surat. The Bombay High Court while dismissing the writ had held that Petitioner being the mother of the children alone cannot be a factor for passing an order in her favour. The court had further held that the children during the interaction with the court had expressed that since they have been in India for quite some time and developed roots in the country they do not wish to move to America. The High Court, thus dismissed the Habeas Corpus petition. The petitioner/mother approached the Supreme Court against this order of the High Court.

The Supreme Court initially issued notice on the said Special Leave Petition and on a couple of occasions heard the parties at length. Thereafter, the Supreme Court directed the children to appear before the them for a virtual interaction.The CJI after interacting with the children remarked that sum and substance was that the children were not willing to go with the mother. The CJI further observed that the scope of a Habeas Corpus petition was very limited before the Supreme Court and in light of the same disposed off the said Habeas Corpus petition.

The petitioner was represented by Siddharth Bhatnagar, Senior Advocate, briefed by Debmalya Banerjee-Partner, Rohan Sharma, Nicholas Choudhury, and Anmol Advocates from Karanjawala & Co.

Case title: DELNA KHAMBATTA (THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER RUZAN KHAMBATTA) Vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA