New Delhi [India] October 4 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has directed a woman to file a response on a petition by her husband who is a Pakistani British National seeking the repatriation of their two minor sons to the United Kingdom. The mother has refused to go back to England with two sons.
Her husband has approached the Delhi High Court seeking direction to repatriate his two minor sons (British Citizens) to the United Kingdom.
The children have been brought to India by the wife of the petitioner and living with her since September 2023 in Delhi.
The wife has also already filed a custody petition before a Delhi court. She is living in Yamuna Vihar with her sister and father.
The division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma directed the respondent’s wife to file a response to the petition within two weeks.
She appeared before the court with her sons. The court interacted with her. The court also interacted with the petitioner’s husband Yasir Ayaz through virtual mode.
The court observed that the respondent’s wife is not willing to go back to England with two children.
The High Court said that Because the wife is not willing to go back to the UK with the two children, the matter would have to be heard on merits.
” In the meantime, let the arrangement as given in the order dated 14th August 2024 passed by High Court of Justice, Family Division, UK continue till the next date of hearing,” the division bench said on October 3.
The Delhi High Court directed Insofar as the video calls are concerned, the wife-respondent would permit the children to have unmonitored calls with the Petitioner-father.
On September 26 the High Court had directed the respondent’s wife to appear before the court along with the children.
Now the matter has been listed for hearing on October 24.
Advocate Khalid Akhtar submitted that the petitioner is the father of the children and is not allowed to communicate with them. They are brought here by their mother.
Petitioner Yasir Ayaz moved a habeas corpus petition through Advocates Khalid Akhtar, and Abdullah Akhtar directing the Respondent to produce the children before the High Court and, thereafter, direct their immediate return to the United Kingdom.
The petitioner has also sought direction to the wife to assist in the return of the children to the United Kingdom and to assist in enforcing the return order and ensuring the safe return of the children to their habitual residence in the UK.
He has also sought a direction restraining the wife from initiating or continuing any proceedings in India
concerning the custody or guardianship of the children, in deference to the jurisdiction of the UK courts.
The plea has also sought to direct the wife to facilitate the communication facilities between the Petitioner and the children.
It is stated that in 2006 the couple met in the UK and got married. Two sons were born out of wedlock in 2014 and 2018.
It is stated in the plea that in August 31, the Respondent (Wife) and children travelled to India with her sister.
Before the respondent departed for India, her husband asked her for her father’s phone number in India so he could stay in touch. But, shockingly, she gave the petitioner a wrong number, the petitioner alleged.
The plea also stated that on November 1, 2023, the Respondent entered into an agreement notarized and
stamped on 01.11.2023, although it mentions that the agreement commenced retrospectively from 01.09.2023, the same day on which the Respondent landed in India.
The Respondent moves custody application before the Karkardooma District Court, New Delhi.
The Petitioner asked her to confirm their return as visa of the children (British nationals) was about to expire on 06.11.2023 or 07.11.2023.
She told the Petitioner that she had already applied for a visa extension of the children through her someone her father knew. The petitioner was left with no choice than to give consent for the extension of the visa of the children. And so, the Petitioner gave his consent on 08.11.2023, the plea added.
It is further stated that after around two weeks, Respondent communicated the Petitioner that visa extension has been granted until 14.02.2024.
He also said that the Respondent had brought all the documents with her to India without the knowledge of the Petitioner and deleted all documents from the Petitioner’s laptop. And also brought Petitioner’s personal hard drive.
On January 28, 2024, the Respondent called suddenly after not talking for 2 weeks that from now on, all communications shall be through advocate only.
The petitioner received summons from the Karkardooma District Court to be present on 29.02.2024.
On February 23, 2024, the Petitioner moved to the U.K High Court seeking return order of the children who are British nationals on grounds that the mother has kept them without permission of their father and such it is a criminal offence in the United Kingdom.
The U.K High Court had directed the Respondent-wife to file reply by 27.02.2024 whether the children should be made wards of court; and whether the summary return of the children to England and Wales should be ordered.
The respondent did not appear in the virtual hearing before the UK High Court, nor filed a reply. Thereafter, Respondent was directed that the children should be made available for video contact with their father on at least 2 occasions each week, Wednesday and Saturday. The Respondent did not comply, the plea said.
The plea said that the Respondent was further asked to file reply before the UK High Court by 05.04.2024
in addition to the direction issued on 23.02.2024, to set out her position whether it is her case that the proceedings in India should take precedence.
On April 4, 2024, Respondent sent the U.K High Court a reply stating that she disputed the court’s jurisdiction, and that the appropriate forum for determining the children’s welfare was India. She
opposed any order requiring her to return the children to England and Wales.
The U K High Court held that the children were habitual residents of the U.K. and refused the reply of the Respondent who prayed for a stay of the Petitioner’s case stating forum conveniens.
The U.K High Court held the final hearing on 09.08.2024, in the matter on the kids return order where on 16.08.2024, and passed an order of return along with judgment for the children on grounds that the children are British nationals, cause of action – habitual residence and forum conveniens is the United Kingdom and not India, the plea said. (ANI)
Disclaimer: This story is auto-generated from a syndicated feed of ANI; only the image & headline may have been reworked by News Services Division of World News Network Inc Ltd and Palghar News and Pune News and World News
HINDI, MARATHI, GUJARATI, TAMIL, TELUGU, BENGALI, KANNADA, ORIYA, PUNJABI, URDU, MALAYALAM
For more details and packages
