The paramount consideration of the welfare of the child and the child's preference are crucial factors in determining custody matters.

SUDIP AHLUWALIA, J.

1. This Revisional Application is directed against the Order dated 04.12.2018 passed by the Ld. Additional Civil Judge (Senior Davison), S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali whereby the Application moved by Mrs. Amandeep Bains-Respondent No.1 seeking grant of interim and temporary custody of her minor child namely Sahib Inder Deep Singh, aged more than 8 years had been allowed.

2. The impugned order was passed on an Application for interim custody of the minor child moved by Respondent No.1 under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (for short "the Act of 1890") in her main Guardianship Petition, in which, the Petitioner, who happens to be her husband, and three other members of his family being his mother, brother and sister-in-law, who are Proforma Respondent Nos.2 to 4 in this Revisional Application, were made Respondents.

3. The background leading upto the filing of the Guardianship Petition by Respondent No.1 is chequered and somewhat unpleasant. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to first take note of the certain events starting from the marriage of the Petitioner and Respondent No.1, which took place on 12.8.2007. The minor child (son) namely Sahib Inder Deep Singh was born on 31.1.2012. The marital relationship between the parents was not smooth. The father i.e. the Petitioner had initially filed a Petition seeking dissolution of marriage against Respondent No.1 on 19.1.2018 which was subsequently withdrawn after some attempts at reconciliation. His grievance against his wife (Respondent No.1) was that she had treated him and his family members with physical and mental cruelty. On the other hand, contention of the wife was that the Petitioner, who is an IPS Officer, was involved in an extra marital affair with a junior lady Police Officer, on account of which, he had not only been mistreating his wife, but had also neglected to take appropriate care of his minor son as expected of a good father. After withdrawal of the initial Petition u/s 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act by the Petitioner, there was some sort of temporary reconciliation between the parties, by which time, he was posted as A.I.G., Policy and Rules at Chandigarh since April, 2018 and was also assigned additional charge as AIG Cyber Crime, Jalandhar one year later.

4. As a consequence of the reconcliation effected between the parties, both the parents along with minor child decided to shift to the Petitioner's parental house at Jalandhar, and they accordingly moved there with the minor child who initially was studying in "Manav Mangal Smart School" at Mohali, but it had subsequently closed for summer vacations on 22.5.2018. The parties resided together in the family house of the Petitioner at Jalandhar with his other family members for about a month, after which some discord arose between them. A sequence of criminal case and counter case between them followed in which each side claimed to be the victim of physical violence/attacks by the other side with his/her family members. It is the Petitioner's claim that the Respondent-wife had herself returned with her parents from her husband's house in Jalandhar on the evening of 27.6.2018, although the version of the wife was that she had been assaulted and driven out of the house and that custody of the minor child was forcibly taken from her, even though he continued to be a student in "Manav Mangal Smart School" at Mohali.

5. Subsequently, the Respondent-wife filed a Habeas Corpus Petition, being CRWP No.540 of 2018 on 3.7.2018 seeking recovery of the minor child from illegal custody of the Petitioner and his family members. Notice of motion was issued on her Application for 17.7.2018, on which date, the Respondent-husband appeared in Court with the child, which was followed by attempts at fresh reconciliation between the parties, on account of which, the matter was adjourned to 21.9.2018. On that date, the Court awarded interim custody of the minor child to Respondent No.1-wife for two days wi