JUDGMENT :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

1. This misc. appeal under Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 read with Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been preferred claiming the following relief :

“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that this appeal may kindly be allowed and the order dated 01.07.2019 passed by the learned Family Court, Udaipur to the extent of rejection of custody to the appellants, may kindly be set aside and the application filed by the appellants under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act may kindly be allowed in toto and the respondents may kindly be directed to hand over the custody of Master Mohd. Sultan to the appellants forthwith. Any other appropriate order which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and favourable to the welfare of the wards may kindly be passed in favour of the appellants.”

2. Brief facts of this case, as noticed by this Court, are that the appellants/applicants are grandfather and grandmother (maternal), and respondent No.1/non-applicant is father of the child and the respondents No.2 and 3/non-applicants are grandfather and grandmother (paternal). The current custody of the child, namely, Master Mohd. Sultan is with the respondents/non-applicants, and the same is being sought by the appellants/applicants.

3. Smt. Nargis Bano daughter of the appellants got married to respondent No.1-Mohd. Imran on 16.05.2014 and a male child, Master Mohd. Sultan was born on 10.02.2015. The allegation is that under undue harassment caused by the respondents, Smt. Nargis Bano committed suicide on 24.08.2016, resulting into lodging of an FIR at Police Station, Ghantaghar, Udaipur. Thereafter, the police, after due investigation, filed a charge-sheet against the respondents for the offences under Sections 498A, 304B and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and accordingly, the trial commenced.

4. Mr. Khet Singh Rajpurohit, learned counsel for the appellants/applicants submits that a compromise had happened between the parties during the course of criminal trial vide agreement dated 17.05.2017, in which it was agreed that the custody of Master Mohd. Sultan was to remain with the appellants/applicants, as they assured proper care of education, welfare and future development of the child. Such compromise, as per learned counsel for the appellants/applicants, also resulted into acquittal of the respondent No.1 in the criminal case by the Court of learned Additional District Judge (Women Atrocities), Udaipur.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants/applicants further submits that thereafter breaching the aforementioned compromise, custody of Master Mohd. Sultan was forcibly taken away by the respondents and the same resulted into filing of complaint by the appellants/applicants under Section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Additional District Magistrate (City), Udaipur, wherein the Additional District Magistrate observed that since the matter pertained to the custody of the ward, therefore, the said forum has no jurisdiction and the appellants/applicants were directed to approach the appropriate forum. Thus subsequently, the application in question was moved under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act by the appellants/applicants before the learned Family Court, Udaipur seeking custody of the child, Master Mohd. Sultan. However, the said application, to the extent of handing over of custody of the child to the appellants/applicants, was rejected vide the impugned order dated 01.07.2019.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants/applicants also submits that the paramount welfare of the child is with the maternal grandparents, as the education, welfare and future development of Master Mohd. Sultan would be taken care of in their custody in a better way.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants/applicants further submits that the conduct of the non-applicant/respondent No.1-husband causing harassment to Smt.Nargis Bano resulted into her death by committing suicide, but still the maternal grandpa