SURESH vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

$~24 & 25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 13.11.2025 + W.P.(CRL) 3346/2025 SURESH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Adv., Ms. Deeksha Gaur and Ms. Parul Sharma, Advs. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, St. Counsel (Crl) with Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Adv. with Insp. Narender, PS-Nangloi. 25 + W.P.(CRL) 3492/2025 YASH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Adv., Ms. Deeksha Gaur and Ms. Parul Sharma, Advs. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, St. Counsel (Crl) with Ms. Priyam Agarwal, Adv. with Insp. Narender, PS-Nangloi. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (Oral) 1. Present petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 B.N.S.S., 2023, seeking issuance of writs in the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAM W.P.(CRL) 3346/2025 & connected Page 1 of 3 KUMAR Signing Date:14.11.2025 17:50:08 nature of habeas corpus. 2. In W.P. (Crl.) No. 3346/2025, the petitioner, Mr. Suresh, seeks a direction to the respondents to produce his minor grandchild, Master Shivansh, aged about nine months. 3. In W.P. (Crl.) No. 3492/2025, the petitioner, Mr. Yash Kumar, son of Mr. Suresh, seeks a direction to the respondents to produce his wife, Ms. Pooja Kumari, and their minor child, Master Shivansh, who are allegedly in the illegal custody of one Mr. M.R. Arif. 4. Since both the petitions arise out of the same set of facts and involve common questions, these have been taken up together. 5. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner Mr. Yash Kumar who is visually impaired person, got married to Ms. Pooja Kumari on 19.05.2021. It is alleged that since marri