IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Rajesh S. Patil, J.
Abhishek Ajit Chavan - Petitioner
Versus
Gauri Abhishek Chavan - Respondent
Writ Petition No.4060 of 2024
Decided On : 19-04-2024
JUDGMENT :
Rajesh S. Patil, J.
This Writ Petition is filed by the Husband, challenging the judgment and order dated 27 February 2024, passed by the Judge of the Family Court, Mumbai, thereby dismissing the husband application (exhibit-147) in Divorce Petition filed by the husband (exhibit-147) was filed by the husband seeking temporary custody of minor daughter aged 9 years now.
2. The Petitioner (husband) and the respondent (wife) got married on 18 February 2010. For the convenience, the Petitioner is referred as "Husband" and Respondent is referred as "wife". The husband is an I.T. profession and the wife is a doctor by profession. On 4 January 2015 daughter was born out of the wedlock of the petitioner and respondent.
3. On 7 December 2019 as per the case of wife, she was driven out of the matrimonial house and the custody of the daughter was not given to her. According to the husband, the wife on her own had left the matrimonial house.
4. A police complaint was lodged by the wife against the husband on 2 January 2020. Thereafter, as per the case of the wife, she and her father were assaulted by the husband, the minor daughter was snatched.
5. On 16 January 2020 the wife lodged F.I.R. No. 15 of 2020 against the husband and his family members, under Section 498A, 377, 354, 323, 506, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
6. The wife on 22 January 2020 filed a complaint under Domestic Violence Act, before the JMFC, at Boriwali. So also, an application was filed for seeking interim custody of the minor daughter.
7. Subsequently, on 27 January 2020 the husband filed divorce petition under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court at Mumbai, against the wife. In the month of March 2020 the pandemic started and virtually everything was closed down. The custody of minor daughter remained with the husband. On 1 September 2020 the police filed "B" summary in the police complaint filed by the wife. The said order of "B" summary was subsequently challenged via Protest Petition by the wife. On 9 November 2020 the wife filed her written statement as well as counter-claim in the divorce proceedings filed by the husband before the Family Court at Bandra Mumbai.
8. The wife thereafter made an application before the Family Court for granting interim custody of minor daughter during the pendency of the divorce petition filed by the husband. And a prayer of access to minor daughter was sought. By an order dated 12 February 2020 the Family Court, Bandra Mumbai granted access to wife, for four days of minor daughter from 1.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m.
9. By further order dated 18 May 2020, the Family Court, Bandra Mumbai passed an order thereby granting virtual access of minor daughter, from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. on alternate days.
10. On 4 August 2020 the Family Court, Bandra Mumbai did not grant physical access due to lock down, however, the virtual access has granted by the Court by an order dated 18 May 2020 continued, and it was directed that the said virtual access should be recorded.
11. The Family Court on 9 November 2020 granted physical access of minor daughter to wife, from 14 November 2020 to 17 November 2020. The said order was passed by consent, as it was Diwali Vacation.
12. Thereafter, on 19 December 2020 the Family Court passed an order, with regard to Christmas Vacation, allowing the wife to have physical vacation of minor daughter from 24 December 2020 to 1 June 2021. And so also access on 4 January 2021, on birthday of minor daughter.
13. On 6 February 2021 the Family Court Mumbai, passed an order thereby granting weekend access of minor daughter on 2nd and 4th Friday to Sunday, of every month to the wife, and the virtual access of alternate days, was cancelled as the husband had objected to it on the ground that the virtual access was stressful for the daughter.
14. Since the virtual access cancelled, the wife challenged the order dated 6 February 2021, passed by the Family Court, Mumbai by way
The paramount consideration in custody disputes is the welfare of the child, not the parents' rights or allegations against them.
Minor child does not have coping skills or intellectual ability to understand issues between adult relationship or parents unhappiness.
In custody disputes involving minors under five, the court prioritizes the welfare of the child and generally favors maternal custody unless compelling circumstances dictate otherwise.
Courts prioritize a child's welfare in custody disputes, generally favoring mothers for children under five, unless specific circumstances suggest otherwise.
The welfare of the minor is of paramount consideration in custody matters. A father who is facing trial under the POCSO Act and is accused of molesting his own daughter cannot be given custody of the....
The welfare of a minor child is paramount in custody decisions, particularly during puberty, necessitating the mother's active role in care and support.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.