MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
Regular-article-logo Monday, 30 June 2025

STREET LEGAL 04-10-2006

Custody battle Private defence Who’s the father?

The Telegraph Online Published 04.10.06, 12:00 AM

Custody battle

A man challenged the order of the Delhi High Court granting custody of his children to the mother on the ground that the court did not have inherent jurisdiction since the children stayed with their paternal grandparents in Guwahati. The court rejected the contention because the mother had filed the case after the children were removed from Delhi to Guwahati without her consent. The court held that this act of “interparental” kidnapping did not deprive it of inherent jurisdiction though an objection of territorial jurisdiction could have been raised earlier. Since the concerned parties had earlier consented to resolve the dispute, the plea of lack of territorial jurisdiction could not be raised at this stage (Amrit Pal Singh vs Jasmit Kaur).

Private defence

A man convicted of murder and unlawful assembly appealed before the Supreme Court that his sentence be reconsidered. Since the murder happened on disputed land, the court should consider his right of private defence, the man pleaded. The court ruled that it would have considered the plea if the accused was in possession of the disputed land and the deceased had trespassed into it. In this case, however, the deceased was in possession of the land and was ploughing it when he was obstructed by the accused. The deceased was unarmed and injury marks were found on his body. So the court dismissed the plea (Ashok Kumar vs State of Tamil Nadu).

Who’s the father?

A woman challenged the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court asking her and her son to undergo a DNA test since her husband doubted the paternity of the child who was born just seven months after the wedding. The woman contended that according to the Evidence Act, the onus of proving that he was not the father of her son lay with her husband since the baby was born after seven months of a valid marriage. She also pointed out that the Supreme Court permitted such tests only in deserving cases. The court ruled that the case under consideration was a deserving case as matrimonial ties were based on trust and the result of this test could dispel the doubts that had crept into their marriage (Smt. Savitabai vs Chandrabhan Dubey).

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT