The Delhi High Court in the case Seema v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors observed and took the sympathetic view in a daughter’s habeas corpus plea moved in respect of her mother. The Division bench comprising of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Shalinder Kaur was hearing the present case.
In the present case, the petitioner-daughter had filed the petition stating that her mother was initially residing with her. Thus, sometimes back, the brother of her had taken their mother to reside with him.
It has also been alleged that he had assured that their mother would be dropped back in a few days.
However, the court observed that an inspector from Police Station Krishna Nagar appeared before the court with the Standing Counsel for Delhi Police and has appraised the said court that he had visited the petitioner’s mother.
Therefore, Suring the interaction with her, he had stated and found that she was living comfortably and willingly with her son.
The said court perused a video-recording of the said interaction.
The petitioner in the plea pointed out that the her mother is 90 years old and she beseeched the court to allow her to meet her mother once.
The court in the case noted that it did not have the power to direct the petitioner’s mother to meet her.
However, the court while taking a sympathetic view, in its order stated that since she being the daughter and considering that the mother has not said anything against her and has also not denied meeting her, therefore, we hereby dispose of the present writ petition by giving direction to the abovementioned Inspector and that he shall take the petitioner to the house of her brother in order to meet her mother.
The court stated that the date and time for the meeting were fixed and that if the mother of the petitioner wished to accompany her daughter, she would be at liberty to do so.
The Division bench of the Bombay High Court in the case observed and has granted similar relief to a 93-year-old woman’s daughter in a case of alleged wrongful detention by the woman’s other daughter.
The counsel, Advocate Mr. Deepanshu Goswami appeared for the petitioner with petitioner in person.
The counsel, Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.); Mr. Priyam Agarwal, Mr. Shivesh Kaushik & Mr. Abhinav Kr. Arya, Advocates; and Insp. Arjun Singh PS Krishna Nagar represented the respondent(s).