The Supreme Court will hear a plea filed by the mother of Atul Subhash, a Bengaluru-based engineer who committed suicide in 2024 alleging harassment by his wife and his in-laws, seeking his minor son's custody on Monday (Jan 20).
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma is likely to hear the plea by Anju Devi who has filed a habeas corpus petition, seeking the custody of her four-year-old grandson.
Also read | 'Snatch justice if necessary': Father of RG Kar victim says 'will not beg', ahead of final verdict
Apex Court earlier denied the minor's custody
Earlier, on January 7, the apex court had denied her the minor's custody saying she was a "stranger to the child".
"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," the top court had said.
The court granted bail to Atul's wife and in-laws
The 34-year-old Subhash was found hanging at his house in Bengaluru's Munnekolalu on December 9, 2024, leaving behind video and written notes, alleging harassment by his estranged wife, Nikita Singhania, and his in-laws.
Later they were arrested on charges of abetting Subhash's suicide and granted conditional bail on January 4.
Also read | Maha Kumbh 2025: Organisers use AI to prevent stampedes, ensure safety of 400mn pilgrims
During the last hearing, the top court was informed by the counsel appearing for Subhash's estranged wife Nikita Singhania that the child was studying at a boarding school in Haryana.
"Yesterday, the mother reached Faridabad and took custody of the child from boarding school. We will take the child to Bengaluru. The mother has to remain in Bengaluru to fulfil the bail conditions," her counsel told the bench.
Advocate Kumar Dushyant Singh, representing Devi, had sought the child's custody and alleged her estranged daughter-in-law had kept the child's location under wraps.
He had argued a child below six years of age should not be sent to a boarding school and relied on photos to show the petitioner interacting with the child when he was only a couple of years old.
The apex court had then directed the child to be produced in court on the next hearing on January 20 and said the case couldn't be decided based on a media trial.
"It's not a media trial. It's a court trial which can pronounce a person guilty," added the top court while posting the matter for hearing on January 20.
(Inputs from the agencies)