The welfare of the child, as guided by the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, including considerations of the child's religion, the criminal background of the father, and allegations of sexual assault, is paramount in determining guardianship.

1. The paternal and the maternal grandmother both have conflicting claim to be appointed as guardian of a minor girl Zeenat.

2. This First Appeal is directed against the order dated 5th May, 2014 passed by the District Judge, Mangaon, District Raigad, below Exhibit 1 of Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2014 preferred by the maternal grandmother/present respondent under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 for her appointment as guardian of minor girl Zeenat. The facts of the case are summarized as follows:

On 11th May, 2008 Nimmy and Aatif got married. It was a love marriage. Aatif is muslim and Nimmy was hindu. On 8th August, 2008 Nimmy was converted to Islam and was renamed as Bushra. On 2nd March, 2009 Zeenat was born. On 11th March, 2013 Aatif strangulated Nimmy (Bushra) and committed murder of his wife in Dubai. At the relevant time, the child was kept with her paternal mother temporarily, as the deceased mother was to return from Dubai in April to take the child with her. Bushra was cremated at Nandvi (Raigad) as per muslim rites. On 20th March, 2013 the maternal grandmother/respondent took Zeenat to Kerala. On 29th April, 2013 the appellant/paternal grandmother took custody of Zeenat to perform the last rites of Bushra and thereafter she was never returned to the respondent. The maternal grandmother asked for custody of the child. However, it was refused by the appellant. A criminal case was filed with Mangaon police station in June, 2013. The respondent/maternal grandmother filed Habeas Corpus Writ Petition in this Court for production of the child, which was dismissed, as alternate remedy was available for seeking custody of the child. Thereafter the respondent filed Miscellaneous Application No. 7 of 2014 for custody and guardianship of the minor girl at Mangaon, District Raigad where Zeenat was residing with the appellant/paternal grandmother. On 19th February, 2014, Aatif was convicted and given a death penalty. At present he is in Dubai. The Application under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 was contested by the appellant by filing reply. Both the grandmothers claim that they are financially well to take care of the child. Both claim that they can provide better education and environment for the development of the child. The appellant claims that the child being muslim, she should stay in a Muslim family so that she can profess her religion in a proper manner. The trial Court, after considering both the sides, passed the order and appointed the respondent/maternal grandmother as guardian of the minor child. It was directed that the child is to be handed over to the maternal grandmother on or before 21st May, 2014. Hence, this First Appeal.

3. The Appeal is admitted on 15th September, 2014 and directed that the matter is to be heard expeditiously. The order of the District Court was stayed. However, access is given to the respondent/maternal grandmother for a week during Diwali vacation of 2014 and 15 days in summer vacation of 2015. During Diwali vacation from 19th October to 30th October, i.e., for 10 days Zeenat stayed with her maternal grandmother and the child was returned to her paternal grandmother on 30th October, 2014.

4. On 16th November, 2014 Zeenat was medically examined at Raigad Hospital. (The report states that the injury is 7 days old). On 17th November, 2015 the child was again medically examined at J.J. Hospital. (The report states that the illness of the child is 10 days old). On 26th November, 2014 a criminal case of sexual assault bearing C.R. No. 1682 of 2014 under POSCO was filed against the maternal uncles Nigel Dhananjay by the appellant in Mangaon Police Station, Raigad. On 17th December, 2014, the case of sexual assault was transferred to Thrissur, Kerala on the ground of territorial jurisdiction for further investigation and was registered under sections 4, 8. 12 of POSCO r/w. section 376(2)(f)(i)(l). The history stated by the victim is that in the vacation, her nani, i.e., Usha D