JUDGMENT (Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the minor Enban, aged 6 years old, S/o.M.Sivakumar, autistic elder twin before this Court to restore him to the petitioner's custody.) P.N. Prakash, J. 1. Seeking a direction to the respondents to produce the petitioner's son viz., Enban, aged about 6 years, an autistic elder twin, before this Court and to restore his custody to the petitioner, this habeas corpus petition has been filed. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their respective names. 3. Sivakumar, the fourth respondent herein, married Arasi on 19.11.2009 in Trichy. At the time of marriage, Sivakumar was employed in New Zealand and Arasi was working in an IT company in Scotland, U.K. 4. After marriage, Arasi resigned her job and joined Sivakumar in New Zealand. To this couple, non-identical twins Enban and Eniyan were born on 20.02.2016 in New Zealand, on account of which, they (the twins) became natural citizens of New Zealand. Later, it was discovered that both the children suffer autism. 5. We are not going into the charges that are being traded by Sivakumar and Arasi against each other. But, suffice to state that Arasi returned with the two children to India in August 2018 and took up residence in Madurai and later, she shifted to Chennai, with her two children in February 2020. Since then, she has been residing in No.16/20, 1st Main Road, Saranga Avenue, GRS Nagar, Old Perungalathur, Chennai 600 063 with her two children and father. 6. On account of employment, Sivakumar was forced to stay in New Zealand and according to him, he was financially supporting the children, which is disputed by Arasi. Enban was put in Sri Chaitanya Techno School, Old Perungalathur and he is now studying in I standard. Eniyan has been put in SKB Vidyashram, Old Perungalathur and is in U.K.G. now. 7. According to Arasi, Sivakumar went to the school where Enban was studying and took him away from the school on 04.07.2022. The police complaints given by Arasi, for getting back Enban went in vain and therefore, she has filed the present habeas corpus petition for the custody of Enban. 8. On notice, Sivakumar entered appearance and brought Enban to the Court on 25.08.2022. 9. The police complaints given by Arasi, for getting back Enban went in vain and therefore, she has filed the present habeas corpus petition for the custody of Enban. 8. On notice, Sivakumar entered appearance and brought Enban to the Court on 25.08.2022. 9. On 25.08.2022, this Court passed the following order : “This petition has been filed to direct the Respondents to produce the minor Enban aged 6 years, S/o.M.Sivakumar, autistic elder twin before this Hon'ble Court to restore him to the custody of the petitioner. 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not lodged any criminal complaint against her husband and his family, as she is only interested in the welfare of the children, who are affected with Autism Spectrum Disorder. 3. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that they will prepare a Memorandum of Understanding and find out the modalities for a workable solution. 4. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that till a consensus is arrived at, both the children may be permitted to be with their mother for continuation of treatment and there is no objection for the wife in the husband seeing the children. 5. The only request made by the respondent is that he has been illtreated by his father-in-law and he wants to visit his children only in the absence of his father-in-law. He has stated that even though there was no demand for money on the side of his wife, he has been paying some amount to his wife every month, which is refuted by the petitioner/wife. 6. The disputed question of fact cannot be gone into by this Court in this petition at this stage. Since the petitioner has agreed to permit her husband to visit their children, the respondent the 4th respondent/husband shall give advance intimation to his wife about his visit and at that time, the father of the petitioner shall stay away from them so as to enable the 4th respondent to meet his children and wife under one roof. This is only an interim arrangement. Since the petitioner/wife and her children are going to reside with the 4th respondent/husband, the 4th respondent shall take care of the basic needs of the spouse and children without any default. This is only an interim arrangement. Since the petitioner/wife and her children are going to reside with the 4th respondent/husband, the 4th respondent shall take care of the basic needs of the spouse and children without any default. List this matter on 29.08.2022 immediately after admission, for filing a Memorandum of Understanding by the respective counsel. The presence of the parties is not required on the said date.” 10. Pursuant thereto, Sivakumar handed over the custody of Enban to Arasi on 25.08.2022. 11. In the meanwhile, the advocates of the parties exchanged certain draft agreements which the parties eventually did not sign, because, both of them found some objectionable clauses therein. It is alleged by Sivakumar that his father-in-law Rajendra Devan is playing spoilsport and is not permitting Sivakumar to reunite with Arasi and bring up the children together. It is alleged by Arasi that Sivakumar had issued a legal notice dated 12.01.2022, asking her to give consent for dissolution of their marriage. She further stated that, she filed a case in a Court in New Zealand against Sivakumar, in connection with some properties which they were jointly owning there. Sivakumar was asked by the New Zealand Court to respond to the case on 25.05.2022. To thwart that case, Sivakumar has filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.136 of 2022 in the Family Court, Tanjore, for restitution of conjugal rights. 12. When we pointed out the contradictory stands that have been taken by Sivakumar, in that, after having asked for a divorce in the legal notice dated 12.01.2022, he has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, Mr.C.Emalias, learned counsel for Sivakumar, submitted that Sivakumar had changed track, on account of exchange of certain notices between the parties in the interregnum. This is a disputed question of fact and the same cannot be gone into in this habeas corpus petition. It is for the parties to justify before the appropriate Court by leading evidence as to the circumstances under which Sivakumar changed track. We are leaving it at that. 13. With regard to the request of Sivakumar that he would be willing to join and live with Arasi, provided her father keeps himself away, Arasi stated that the same is not possible because, it was her father who had given her emotional, physical and financial support, while Sivakumar was away in New Zealand by taking care of her two children. With regard to the request of Sivakumar that he would be willing to join and live with Arasi, provided her father keeps himself away, Arasi stated that the same is not possible because, it was her father who had given her emotional, physical and financial support, while Sivakumar was away in New Zealand by taking care of her two children. This is also a disputed question of fact, which we cannot go into in this habeas corpus petition. 14. From the facts admitted by both sides, it is clear that the two children were with Arasi from August 2018 onwards and that Sivakumar had taken away Enban from the school on 04.07.2022, but has restored Enban to Arasi on 25.08.2022. Now, both the children are with Arasi and they are going to school. In our opinion, the custody of the two children with Arasi cannot be said to be per se illegal. It is open to the parties to approach the appropriate Court for guardianship, if so advised. Sivakumar prayed for at least visitation rights to see his children, for which Arasi wholeheartedly agreed and stated that Sivakumar can come and visit the children in her house. 15. Recording our appreciation for her gesture, we permit Sivakumar to take both the children viz., Enban and Eniyan on every Sunday commencing 18.09.2022 at 10.00 a.m. and drop them back by 5.00 p.m. at Arasi's house. If Sivakumar does not return the children as stipulated by this Court, it is open to Arasi to immediately lodge a complaint to the 2nd respondent police and action shall be taken to restore the children to her. Arasi shall ensure that children are made available on Sundays for Sivakumar to have free visitation for taking them with him. It is made clear that this arrangement is purely a temporary one. It is open to the appropriate Court to pass orders with regard to the custody and other rights of the parties. The appropriate Court may proceed with the case without in any manner being influenced by what is stated above. It is open to the appropriate Court even to modify the above order of interim visitation that has been granted by us to Sivakumar, if it deems just and necessary. We make it clear that Rajendra Devan shall not, in any way, interfere when Sivakumar exercises his visitation rights. It is open to the appropriate Court even to modify the above order of interim visitation that has been granted by us to Sivakumar, if it deems just and necessary. We make it clear that Rajendra Devan shall not, in any way, interfere when Sivakumar exercises his visitation rights. With the above observations and directions, this habeas corpus petition stands closed.