The welfare of a minor child is paramount in custody decisions, particularly during puberty, necessitating the mother's active role in care and support.

JUDGMENT :

Vinod Diwakar,J.

1. Heard Ms. Vijeta Singh, learned counsel for the applicant no.1, Mr. Chandan Sharma assisted by Mr. Shubham Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record.

2. The present application has been preferred for quashing the orders dated 28.08.2023 and 09.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court, Allahabad, as well as the order dated 10.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (MP/MLA), Prayagraj, in Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2024, titled as Saumya Sajiv Kumar Sharma and another v. Sumit Vats, arising out of proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, District Prayagraj.

3. In brief, the facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that the marriage between applicant no.1, [Hereinafter referred to as the “wife”] and respondent no.2, [Hereinafter referred to as the “husband”] was solemnized on 18.01.2013. At the time of marriage, a substantial dowry comprising jewellery, cash, and other valuable articles was given by the wife’s parents. Despite this, the in-laws of the wife expressed dissatisfaction with the dowry and persistently demanded additional amounts, subjecting her to continuous physical harassment and mental cruelty. From this wedlock, a girl child named Samriddhi was born, who has been arrayed as applicant no.2, [Hereinafter referred to as the “child”]. She is currently studying in Class-VI at Loreto Convent Intermediate College, Lucknow.

4. After their marriage, the husband and wife resided at various locations, including Delhi, Patna, and Lucknow, in accordance with the postings of the husband. The husband is presently employed as a Deputy Chief Engineer with the Indian Railways. However, due to irreconcilable differences, their matrimonial relationship deteriorated, culminating in filing of an application under Section 12 of the Act, [Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005] This application was filed by the wife before the learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad, on 02.11.2022. In the said proceedings, the wife- being the mother of the minor child- also filed an application seeking interim custody of the minor child.

5. Upon due consideration of the report submitted by the District Probation Officer and the statement of the minor child recorded by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, the prayer for interim custody was rejected by order dated 28.08.2023. However, the learned trial court had granted liberty to the mother to meet her minor child twice a week, specifically on every Saturday and Sunday. Thereafter, by a subsequent order dated 09.10.2023, the conditions governing visitation were modified. The modified order permitted the mother to meet the child in a conducive and healthy environment, either at a nearby park or at the residence of the husband, between 04:00 p.m. to 06:00 p.m. on every Saturday and Sunday.

6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the wife preferred Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2024 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (MP/MLA), Prayagraj. However, the said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 10.09.2024. While rejecting the appeal, the appellate court recorded a finding that the primary consideration in matters of custody is the welfare of the minor child, which, in the present case, was found to be better se