Judgment :- Sreedhar Rao, J. (1) The petitioner is the natural father of one Mithuan, aged about 1 1/2 years. The child is in the custody of the 5th respondent who is the maternal grand-mother. The petitioner has filed the petition seeking custody of the child from the" 5th respondent. (2) It is the contention of the counsel for the 5th respondent that one Hema is her daughter and married to petitioner. In the wedlock one Kum. Archana and the present minor child are born. Hema and Archana died in a suspicious circumstance and found hanging. The 5th respondent was prevented by the petitioner and villagers to give complaint and they worked out some sort of compromise. The minor child was given to the custody of the 5th respondent. In that view the 5th respondent says that the Custody of the child with her is lawful and does not amount to any illegal detention. (3) Counsel for the petitioner, however, denies the contentions made by the counsel for Respt. No. 5. (4) The above facts reveal that the custody of the child cannot be per se called as illegal detention with the respt. No. 5. The child is hardly 1 1/2 years old. serious allegations made against the petitioner that he has caused the death of his wife and another minor daughter. We do not propose to go into the details of the episode relating to suicide in this petition. The question of custody of the child essentially depends upon the civil rights of the persons claiming custody and also the welfare of the minor child. These questions can be effectively and justly adjudicated only by the civil Court. In that view of the matter, the petitioner is directed to approach civil Court. Accordingly, the petition is closed.