The welfare of the child prevails over the natural guardianship rights, as established by the father's inability to demonstrate he could serve the child's best interests compared to the established custodians.

JUDGMENT :

G. Satapathy, J.

1. This appeal U/S.47 of the Guardians & Wards Act, 1890 (in short “the act”) seeks to handover the custody of the child to the father-cum-appellant by removing him from the custody of maternal grandparents and uncle-cum-Respondent No.1 to 3 by setting aside the impugned order dated 31.08.2024 passed by learned Judge Family Court, Jharsuguda in GP No.05 of 2015 dismissing the claim of the father-appellant by continuing the lawful custody of the child with maternal grandfather-cum-R-1 till he attains majority with visitation right to the father-appellant on holidays or any other days with prior notice to grandfather, with further permission to the father-appellant to take the child out of the house of R-1 to 3 for recreation, entertainment or for shopping with concurrence of the child, in an application U/S.25 of the Act.

2. The brief facts involved in this case are that the appellant-Ajay Kumar Nanda @ Pintu is admittedly the husband of late Lipika Padhee, who was the daughter of R-1 and 2 and their marriage was solemnized on 05.12.2013 and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with a child namely Rikun @ Rihan on 26.09.2014 and thereafter, the R-1 and 2 took Lipika and the newly born baby to their house at Khajurtikra, Bargarh after her discharge from the hospital (Patel Nursing Home, Burla) where the child was born. According to the appellant, he got information from R-1 over phone in the night on 29.09.2014 about the ill health condition of Lipika and their child and both were removed directly to Jagyesini Hospital, Jharsuguda from Bargarh and on 03.10.2014, both mother and son after being discharged from Jagyesini Hospital were brought back to the house of the appellant at Buromal, Jharsuguda, but unfortunately the health condition of Lipika deteriorated and she passed away in the night of the same day on 03.10.2014 at DHH, Jharsuguda due to heart failure on account of Hypertension and Pulmonary Oedema. The death of Lipika was immediately intimated to R-1 over phone and his relatives reached at the house of the appellant and alleged against the appellant and his parents and other to have committed murder of Lipika by lodging an FIR at Jharsuguda Police Station on 04.10.2014 at about 09AM resulting in registration of Jharsuguda PS Case No.370 of 2014 corresponding to GR Case No.1380 of 2014 in which case the appellant was arrested.

2.1. It is alleged by the appellant that taking advantage of his arrest, R-1 to 3 and their relatives took away the newly born baby with them to their house at Bargarh with his credit card which was subsequently used by the Respondents for purchasing gold ornaments and on 01.11.2014, the elder brother of the appellant approached the police with an FIR, but his effort remains in vain, and thereafter the appellant filed a complaint against R-1 to 3 and four others in 1CC No.260 of 2015 before the learned SDJM, Jharsuguda. For the custody of the child, the appellant also approached the sub- Collector, Jharsuguda in an application U/S.97 of CrPC which was registered as case number 196 of 2014, which was allowed, but R-1 and 2 preferred Criminal Revision No.04 of 2015, which was allowed, but the appellant unsuccessfully challenged such order by preferring Criminal Revision No.231 of 2015 before this Court.

2.2. According to the appellant, a settlement was made between the parties and a compromise agreement was executed on 07.04.2016 and pursuant to such compromise agreement, R-1 to 3 handed over the custody of the minor child to the appellant on 30.01.2017 and the child was accordingly admi