Supreme Court refutes grandma’s wardship appeal with ‘unfamiliar person’ comment–

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the mommy of Atul Subhash, Bengaluru geeky that passed away by self-destruction in 2024, his small boy’s wardship claiming she was “stranger to the child”.

A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and N Kotiswar Singh stated the problem of the kid’s wardship can be elevated on trial performing the test.

“Sorry to say but the child is a stranger to the petitioner. If you wish, please visit the child. In case you want the custody of the child, there is a separate procedure,” stated the bench.

Subhash, 34, that was located hanging at his home in Bengaluru’s Munnekolalu on December 9, 2024, allegedly left prolonged messages, criticizing his other half and in-laws for taking the severe action.

The leading court was listening to a habeas corpus application submitted by Anju Devi, Subhash’s mommy, looking for wardship of her four-year-old grand son.

During the hearing, the leading court was educated by the guidance standing for Subhash’s separated other half Nikita Singhania that the kid was examining at a boarding college in Haryana.

“We will take the child to Bengaluru. We have taken the boy out of school. The mother has to remain in Bengaluru to fulfil the bail conditions,” sent the guidance.

Advocate Kumar Dushyant Singh, standing for Devi, looked for the kid’s wardship and affirmed her separated daughter-in-law had actually maintained kid’s area under covers.

He said a youngster listed below 6 years old need to not be sent out to a boarding college and rely upon pictures to reveal the petitioner engaging with the kid when he was just a number of years of ages.

The pinnacle court guided the kid to be generated in court on the following hearing on January 20, and stated the instance could not be selected the basis of a media test.

A Bengaluru court on January 4 approved bond to Subhash’s separated other half, her mommy Nisha Singhania and sibling Anurag Singhania, in the self-destruction abetment instance.

Following his fatality, an FIR was signed up in Bengaluru versus Nikita and her family members under Sections 108 (abetment of self-destruction) and 3( 5) (usual objective) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.