MUMBAI, June 4 -- The Bombay High Court on Wednesday restored the custody of a three-month-old infant to his mother, observing that a child of such tender age is completely dependent on the mother for survival, care and nourishment. The court came down heavily on the father, holding that his actions had deprived the infant of the care and protection that only a mother can provide, resulting in "grave and irreparable injury and hardship" to the child. "The father has also deprived the child, an infant of only three months, of the care and protection that only a mother can provide and which is paramount for the overall well-being of the child. Such conduct on the part of the father has resulted in grave and irreparable injury and hardship to the infant child," the court observed. A division bench of justices Shyam C Chandak and Farhan P Dubash was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by a 29-year-old woman, who alleged that her husband and his relatives had "illegally and unlawfully detained" her infant son and sought restoration of his custody. According to the petition, filed through advocate Muheet Musani, the couple married in January 2025 and subsequently registered their marriage in Abu Dhabi. The woman alleged that after the marriage, her husband and his relatives subjected her to continuous mental cruelty, humiliation and harassment. The child was born in January 2026. The mother claimed that from the time of the child's birth, her husband and his relatives repeatedly interfered with her care and custody of the infant. They allegedly obstructed breastfeeding, insisted that the child remain under their control and repeatedly pressured her to leave the child behind and return alone to India. The petition further stated that when she resisted these demands, her husband allegedly declared that he would never allow her to retain custody of the infant and shockingly revealed that he had married her solely for the purpose of having a child. In her plea, the woman contended that her husband and his relatives had deliberately concealed the whereabouts of the child and denied her access to her nursing infant, causing severe emotional trauma and acting contrary to the child's welfare and best interests. "They have deliberately concealed the whereabouts of the minor child and denied the Petitioner access to her nursing infant, causing severe emotional trauma and rendering the continued detention of the child wholly unlawful and contrary to his welfare and best interests," the petition stated. The plea further alleged that the respondents had used the infant as a tool for emotional coercion and matrimonial leverage....