reasons, the child was sent to the maternal grand-parents which was the need of the hour at that time since the petitioner himself was also under psychological stress and a family environment was required for the child especially from the grand-parents and that was the sole reason as to why the son of the petitioner who at that point of time was of the age of 5 years was sent to them to be taken care of.” 18. It can thus be clearly seen that according to the case of the respondent-father himself, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, a family environment was required for the child especially from the grandparents and that he had placed the custody of the minor child with the appellant- grandmother for taking his care. It can thus clearly be seen that 17it is not a case that the appellant-grandmother had illegally kept the custody of the minor child. It is the respondent-father who had placed the custody of the minor child with the appellant- grandmother. 19. We are of