HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AFR Court No. - 84 Case :- HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 429 of 2021 Petitioner :- Priyanshu (Minor) Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitendra Kumar Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sameer Shankar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-respondents. 2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of petitioner (minor) through Jai Singh who has asserted to be father of the minor. 3. Pleadings in the petition indicate that soon after the birth of the petitioner (corpus), on 17.02.2018, some dispute arose between his father and mother (Respondent No.4) and on 22.10.2020 when the petitioner was about two years of age the Respondent No.4 left her matrimonial home along with the minor child. It is an admitted fact that the Respondent No.4 has not returned to her matrimonial home since then. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the basis of instructions submits that the Respondent No.4 along with her minor child is living separately and that some litigation is pending between the parties before the Family Court. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter which is pending before the Family Court is under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 i.e. proceedings for divorce. He states that the only relief which is being sought in the present proceedings is a claim related to custody of the minor child. 6. The dispute between the parties, which is sought to be agitated by means of the present petition, essentially is, regarding the custody of the minor child, who is presently about three and a half years of age (date of birth-17.02.2018). 7. In a petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus in a matter relating to a claim for custody of a child, the principal issue which is to be taken into consideration is as to whether from the facts of the case, it can be stated that the custody of the child is illegal. 8. The writ of habeas corpus is a prerogative writ and an extraordinary remedy. It is writ of right and not a writ of course and may be granted only on reasonable ground or probable cause being shown, as held in Mohammad Ikram Hussain vs. State of U.P. and others1 and Kanu Sanyal vs. District Magistrate Darjeeling2. 9. The exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus would, therefore, be seen to be dependent on the jurisdictional fact where the applicant establishes a prima facie case that the detention is unlawful. It is only where the aforementioned jurisdictional fact is established that the applicant becomes entitled to the writ as of right. 10. The object and scope of a writ of habeas corpus in the context of a claim relating to custody of a minor child fell for consideration in Nithya Anand Raghvan Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another3, rohit typing center.