SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Bom) 620

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.C. Gupte, J.
Dharmesh Vasantrai Shah - Appellant
Versus
Renuka Prakash Tiwari - Respondent
Interim Application No. 1 of 2020; Writ Petition No. 2928 of 2019
Decided On : 09-06-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Aditya Pratap, Advocate, Abhishek Pungliya, Advocate

The case reaffirms the legal principle that under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, the mother is the natural guardian of an illegitimate child, unless specific exceptions apply.

Headnote:

Custody - Family Law - Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act - Section 6

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a custody dispute over a minor child born out of a romantic relationship. The petitioner sought interim custody and an injunction to prevent the respondent from taking the child out of India.

Finding of the Court:

The Family Court found that the respondent, as the child's mother, had been the primary caretaker since the child's birth and that it was in the child's best interest to remain in her custody. The court dismissed the petitioner's claims of the respondent's mental instability and upheld the respondent's right to the child's guardianship.

Issues: Custody dispute, Allegations of mental instability, Application of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, which establishes the mother as the natural guardian of an illegitimate child, unless certain exceptions apply. The court found no legal basis for the petitioner's claim to custody over the respondent.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the court upheld the respondent's right to the child's custody.

JUDGMENT

S C Gupte, J. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

    2. This writ petition challenges an order passed by the Family Court at Pune on an interim application made by the Petitioner herein (original Petitioner before the Family Court in a custody petition). The interim application had sought interim custody of Master Omiraj Shah, who is the minor son of the parties. It had also sought an interim injunction restraining the Respondent from taking the minor out of India, besides other related or consequential reliefs. By the impugned order, the Family Court rejected the interim application.

      3. The short facts of the case, borne out by the narration in the petition, may be stated as follows :-

        According to the Petitioner, Master Omiraj Dharmesh Shah, who is six years old as of the date of the petition (currently seven years) was born to the parties out of a romantic relationship. The Petitioner claims to have met the Respondent sometime in or about 2008 and been in a romantic relationship with her from 2011 onwards and until June 2012. Master Omiraj was born to the Respondent on 11 December 2012. It is not in dispute that ever since his birth, the child has stayed with the Respondent, though in a flat which is jointly owned by the parties. The Petitioner claims to be living separately with his parents and son from his first marriage at another place in Pune. He, however, claims to have visited Master Omiraj three to four times a week and sometimes overnight whilst the child continued to reside with the Respondent. It is his case that from about June 2018, the Respondent has cut-off the Petitioner''s access to Master Omiraj. It is the Petitioner''s case that the Respondent is of a quarrelsome and violent nature; going by the fact that she has changed the schools attended by Master Omiraj on a couple of occasions, on one particular occasion after levying sexual harassment allegations against a member of the school staff and filing a complaint with the police in that behalf, and also by reason of the fact that there have been complaints as between the Respondent and some of her neighbours, which have resulted into FIRs, she is mentally and emotionally unfit to have the custody of Master Omiraj. It is submitted that the Respondent has made conscious efforts to minimise the social interaction of Master Omiraj with others. It is the Petitioner''s case that the Respondent has applied to FRRO for an exist visa for Master Omiraj in order to go to New Zealand. On these facts, the Petitioner has claimed permanent custody of the minor son as final relief in the pending petition. His interim application, as noted above, has been for interim custody and a temporary injunction against the Respondent for taking the child out of India.

        4. The application has been opposed by the Respondent on several grounds. It is submitted, firstly, that the Petitioner has not till date accepted the marriage between the parties, which is claimed to have taken place at Mulshi in Pune on 28 November 2009 as per Hindu rites and rituals. It is submitted that the Petitioner abandoned the Respondent during the pregnancy itself. It is submitted that before abandoning her, the Petitioner even put immense pressure on her to undergo an abortion, with physical assaults and violent intercourse so that she would suffer a miscarriage. It is submitted that the fetus, however, survived the misfortune and Master Omiraj was born on 11 December 2012. It is submitted that since his birth and till date, i.e. for the last seven years, it is the Respondent alone who has brought up the child. It is denied that the Petitioner has any affection or association with the child. The Respondent submits that her minor son has been suffering from autism spectrum disorder and has always been in her exclusive care and maintenance. It is submitted that the Respondent and her minor son are both citizens of New Zealand. It is submitted that the Respondent has made arrangements for admitting th

                                                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                                  1
                                                  2
                                                  3
                                                  4
                                                  5
                                                  6
                                                  7
                                                  8
                                                  9
                                                  10
                                                  11
                                                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                                  supreme today icon
                                                  logo-black

                                                  An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                                  Please visit our Training & Support
                                                  Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                                  qr

                                                  Scan Me!

                                                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                                  whatsapp-icon Back to top