AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The appellant is the husband, the sixth respondent is his wife, and the fifth respondent his father-in-law. Initially the appellant filed W.P.(C) No.30123 of 2017 alleging that the respondent officials, including the Child Welfare Committee and the Kerala State Commission for Protection of Child Rights, have not acted on his complaint. The writ petition dismissed, he has filed this writ appeal.
The allegations are grave and distressing. The appellant accuses the fifth respondent, his father-in-law, of pedofile. According to him, his daughter aged 6-the fifth respondent's granddaughter-is being abused.
The record reveals that the relationship between the husband and wife has been strained, and litigation before various forums has been pending between them.
In a summary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, we cannot go into the allegations of this nature, which require deeper probe and more delicate approach than are permitted under summary disposition. And it involves factual adjudication, too.
In these circumstances, we dismiss the writ appeal; yet, we clarify that the appellant can approach an appropriate forum-for instance, the Family Court, where matters have already been pending-and ventilate his grievance. We are sure, in that event, the forum concerned could look into his grievance. We also clarify that the observations we made or made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment will not affect the adjudicatory ambit of the Family Court or any other forum the appellant approaches.