Allegations of adultery do not disqualify a parent from custody; the welfare of the child is paramount, necessitating psychological evaluation in custody disputes.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, J.:- Appellant Suman filed a petition under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 read with Section 6 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Pehowa, thus seeking the custody of her minor daughter and son, who were respectively aged about 6 years and 3 years at the time of filing of the petition (supra), before the learned Family Court concerned.

2. Through a decision made, on 06.02.2020, on the petition (supra), the said petition became dismissed, but with the rights of visitation vis-a-vis her minor children, inasmuch as, the appellant being permitted to visit her minor children once in a month, thus becoming conferred upon the present appellant.

3. The passing of the aforesaid verdict, has thus led the appellant wife to make an appeal there against.

4. Brief facts of the case The marriage of the appellant was solemnized with the respondent No. 1 on 1.11.2009, at Patiala, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Out of the said wedlock one daughter ‘M and one son ‘V’ were born respectively on 13.8.2010 and on 8.6.2013. Both the said children are in the custody of the respondents i.e. father and the grandparents, and the respondents are alleged to not taking adequate care of the minor children. After one month of the marriage, the respondents had beaten the appellant and called her parents to take her away from the matrimonial home. The parents of the appellant tried to pacify the respondents but in vain. Thereafter respondent No. 1 had left the appellant at Patiala. The appellant remained at Patiala for about 30 days. Subsequently, the parents of the appellant pacified the respondents, whereupon, they agreed to take the appellant to her matrimonial home but the attitude of the respondents did not improve. The respondents are alleged to start harassing, maltreating and beating the appellant on account of hers bringing lesser dowry and cash, and, started demanding a big car and cash from the appellant. However, the appellant requested them that her parents had already spent a huge amount on marriage, hence they were unable to fulfill their illegal demands. When the appellant was six months pregnant, respondent No. 1 left her at Patiala and a female child was born at the parental home of the appellant. All the expenditure were borne by the parents of the appellant. After three months of the delivery, respondent No. 1 took the appellant along with her daughter to the matrimonial home. The respondents started maltreating the child and the appellant as they wanted a male child. The parents of respondent No. 1 kicked out the appellant along with her female minor child from the matrimonial home and they started living at Patiala in a rented accommodation in the year 2011. After one year appellant along with respondent No. 1 and the female minor child shifted to Kalka as respondent No. 1 was having Government Job at Haryana Vidhan Sabha at Chandigarh and the appellant was also transferred to Kalka. The appellant became pregnant for the second time and went to Sandholi at the time of delivery i.e. on 1.6.2013 and stayed there for approximately three months. After three months, she came back to Kalka along with one Santosh, her sister-in-law (Nanad), who used to reside with them at Kalka and interfered in their married life. The respondents started visiting the relatives of the appellant and requested them to create pressure to give him divorce. The respondents after humilating the appellant for not bringing adequate dowry and cash, thus threw her out from the matrimonial home along with her minor children. The respondents also retained with them all the jewellery and dowry articles of the appellant. The parents of the appellant along with the Panchayat member approached the respondents to mend their behaviour but they flatly refused to accede to their request. Thereafter, the appellant along with respondent No. 1 shifted to Sector 12-A, Panchkula,