The Supreme Court on Tuesday morning declined to entertain the plea of Atul Subhash’s mother, who sought custody of her late son’s four-year-old child. The bench, led by Justice Bela M. Trivedi, observed that the child’s mother was alive and, therefore, the paternal grandmother was effectively a stranger to the child.

“We don’t want to say it, but you’re virtually a stranger to the child. If you wish, please visit the child,” the bench told Subhash’s mother. The court further advised her not to label her daughter-in-law guilty until proven otherwise. “In case you want the custody of the child, there is a separate procedure,” one of the judges remarked.

The court, however, kept the habeas corpus petition filed by Subhash’s mother pending for further hearing on January 20.

During the hearing, when asked about the child’s whereabouts, the lawyer representing Atul Subhash’s wife, Nikita Singhania, informed the court that the child was in her custody. The lawyer also noted that Singhania had been in judicial custody but was granted bail last Saturday.

Atul Subhash, a 34-year-old techie from Bengaluru, died by suicide on December 9, leaving behind a 40-page note and a one-and-a-half-hour video in which he accused his wife and her family of harassment. He alleged that his in-laws pressured him to pay Rs 3 crore for a divorce settlement.

Following his death, the Bengaluru police registered a case against Singhania, her mother Nisha Singhania, and her brother Anurag Singhania. The trio was arrested in Uttar Pradesh and brought to Bengaluru.

On Monday, the Karnataka High Court observed that it could not quash the complaint filed against Nikita Singhania, as the allegations in the complaint made out a prima facie case of abetment to suicide.

A Bengaluru court had granted bail to the three accused on Saturday. The court noted that while the investigation is ongoing, sufficient evidence has been provided by the prosecution to justify keeping the case open.

As the legal battle unfolds, the Supreme Court’s decision has left the child’s custody unresolved. The apex court’s next hearing on the matter is scheduled for January 20, with the child’s welfare remaining the primary concern.