4 min readVadodaraFeb 7, 2026 06:03 PM IST
Stating that a working woman seeking help from her parents to raise her child in a secure atmosphere cannot be termed as “unlawful confinement” by a disagreeing husband, the Gujarat High Court Friday dismissed a habeas corpus petition of a man, who sought that his minor daughter be “set at liberty” from the “illegal custody” of her maternal grandparents.
In a 10-page judgment, a division bench comprising Justice N S Sanjay Gowda and Justice D M Vyas held that “merely because it was not acceded to by her husband,” the custody of a minor child handed over to her maternal grandparents by “a mother, due to work constraints or otherwise for the benefit of the child’s upkeep… can never amount to either unlawful custody or illegal confinement.”
The high court observed that in homes of working couples, “the difficulties of raising a child by themselves would also assume great significance and would be beset with a lot of difficulties.”
The order of the HC states that “the husband cannot be permitted to say that such a kind of custody amounts to illegal custody or amounts to unlawful confinement” if a working woman decides to take the help of her parents to ensure that her child is brought up in a secure environment.
The high court was hearing the petition of the father, which stated that both he and his wife were working in senior government positions in Gujarat. After their daughter was born in 2019, the father was transferred to Morbi on promotion, following which, the mother sought transfer and was posted at Mandvi near Morbi and subsequently to Bhachau in Kutch district, at her request, to stay closer to the father of the child. In 2021, the father was also transferred to Bachau and, consequently, they started living together.
Marital discord
The court order noted that “marital discord started” between the couple at this stage, and in August 2023, the mother took the minor daughter to Mehsana, where her parents were living. The court, while dismissing the petition, also noted that the father had issued a legal notice to the mother in October 2024, after about a year of residing separately, “calling upon his wife to agree to the dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent”. In August 2025, the mother filed a complaint against the father alleging domestic violence.
In his submissions before the court, the advocate for the father submitted that he should be given the custody of the daughter as his parents could take care of the child, while the counsel for the mother submitted that it is contended in law that the natural guardian of a 5-year-old child would always be the mother.
Story continues below this ad
The court also noted that the mother and father were “educated and employees of the Union and the State Government,” who had undergone counselling after a September 2025 order of the high court, following which the father was granted visitation rights. The court order stated that the order to facilitate visitation was with “the fond hope that there could be a reconciliation between the mother and father,” and despite the meetings going well, the petition was moved seeking custody of the child by the father.
The court held that since “the mother and father are at loggerheads and the child is being used as a weapon in their battle, in our view, it would be appropriate to permit either of the parties to approach the Family Court to seek… custody of the child.”
© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
