SC denies grandmother’s custody plea in Atul Subhash case | Latest News India

The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down the plea of mother of Atul Subhash, the Bengaluru-based techie who died by suicide alleging harassment by wife and her family, seeking custody of the couple’s minor son, as the court observed that she was a “stranger” to the child and it was open for her to apply for guardianship of the child through appropriate legal proceedings.

The top court was hearing a petition by Anju Devi, the mother of Atul.

Atul died by suicide in December after accusing Nikita and her family members of harassing him and his parents by filing false cases against them. Nikita, her mother Nisha, and her brother Anurag are facing an abetment to suicide case and are currently out on bail.

While the Karnataka police had arrested Nikita in a case of abetment to suicide, in which she is currently out on bail, Atul’s mother filed a habeas corpus petition in the top court seeking the whereabouts of her grandson, born in February 2020. She had named Nikita along with the states of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Karnataka as respondents in her petition.

Also Read:‘They should not have been granted bail’: Atul Subhash’s father questions bail to accused

As the bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma took up the matter on Tuesday, Nikita’s lawyers informed the court that the child was at a boarding school in Haryana from where the child will be transferred and taken to Bengaluru. The Karnataka government also filed an affidavit testifying that the child was studying in a school in Haryana.

The top court directed the lawyers for the Haryana government and Nikita to file an affidavit indicating these facts and posted the matter for further consideration on January 20. The petitioner who approached the top court through advocate Kumar Dushyant Singh said that she had met the child when he was aged 2 years. However, the bench told her that in such cases where the mother of the child is living, custody of the child will naturally go to her.

The bench said that it was open for the petitioner, being the paternal grandmother, to visit the child while pointing out that to take guardianship of the child, proceedings should be initiated under the Guardians and Wards Act.

The matter was last heard by the top court on December 20 when the bench’s concern was to know the safety and well-being of the child.