JUDGMENT :

Goutam Bhaduri, J.

Heard.

1. The instant appeal is preferred by the mother against the impugned judgment dated 28.01.2016 passed in Civil M.J.C. No.09/2014 by the learned Family Court, Mahasamund whereby the custody of the child is given to the respondent/father.

2. The brief facts of the case are that an application was filed under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 by the respondent/father seeking custody of the child namely Dheeraj Kumar, who was born on 12.12.2007. The background of the facts are that the appellant and respondent were married on 05.04.2007. They could not go along eventually a divorce by mutual consent was passed on 04.03.2013 and during such divorce proceedings it was agreed that the child would be in the custody of the mother/appellant herein. Subsequently, the instant application for custody of the child was filed after the child crossed 5 years on the ground that the mother is in company of different male and she used to travel along with other male member and the attire of the lady was not befitting to which would reflect that she had lost her chastity. So if the child is kept in her custody, there would be an ill effect to the mind of child as such the child be given in custody of father. It was also alleged that she was in illicit relation with one Vivek Sharma, therefore, for the welfare of the child, the application for custody was filed.

3. The respondent Pitamber Nai examined himself as AW-1, one Ravi Prakash Pradhan was examined as AW-2, Smt. Saraswati Sharma was examined as AW-3 and Deepak Kumar Sahu was examined as AW-4. While on behalf of appellant/mother, the appellant was examined as NAW-1, one Gaurhari Kewat was examined as NAW-2 and Kamal Kishore Nayak was examined as NAW-3. Learned Family Court, Mahasamud after evaluating the evidence directed the custody of the child to be handed over to the father. Therefore, this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the Family Court only on the statement of the third person has arrived at a conclusion that the child welfare would be with the father. He would further submit that there is nothing on record to establish the fact except those bald oral statements and to draw inference to assassinate character of wife. He would further submit that the documents of the study of the child would show that the welfare of the child is being taken better than that which is proposed by the father. He would further submit that without evaluating the welfare of the child, the orders have been passed only on the basis of presumption, which requires interference.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/father would submit that the order passed by the Family Court, Mahasamund is well merited which do not require any interference. He would further submit that the evidence of the witnesses would show that the appellant/mother was indulged in relation with the other male members of the society and apart from that the evidence of wife of one Vivek Sharma, with whom the appellant was involved, would show that because of such illicit relation the dispute occurred in between Vivek Sharma and his wife, therefore, the inference can be drawn about the character of appellant and as such the welfare of the child would be better in the custody of the father. It is stated that the type of behaviour shown publicly by the mother would affect the mind of the child. He would further submit that the evidence of the parties would show that the mother is habituated to intoxication, consumes liquor and other drugs. He would further submit that moral and ethical values has to be embedded in the mind of the child, which would be missing if the child is allowed to continue in the company of the mother.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

7. Perusal of the record would show that an agreement named and styled as Talaqnama (EX. P/2) was executed in between the parties on 05.07.2009, wherein the husband an