SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Tri) 75

HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
T. Amarnath Goud, J.
Saheli Dey (Kar Bhowmik) & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Shibaji Kar Bhowmik & Anr. - Respondents
CRP No. 92 of 2021
Decided On : 04-01-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. A. Bhowmik, Advocate, for the Petitioners; Mr. Somik Deb, Sr. Advocate, Mr. K. Roy, Advocate, for the Respondents

Children's visitation rights must ensure emotional welfare, favoring shared custody to maintain relationships with both parents.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Revision petition seeking to set aside interim orders of the Judicial Magistrate and Additional Sessions Judge regarding the right of the petitioner to reside in the shared household and seek maintenance - The court laid down specific conditions for visitation and shared custody of minor children based on mutual consent. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Family Law - Visitation Rights - The Court emphasized the importance of allowing children to maintain relationships with both parents without restrictions, advocating for shared parenting arrangements to benefit the children's emotional welfare. (Paras 4 and 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to challenge orders regarding her residential rights and maintenance in the context of a domestic violence case, while both parties agreed on arrangements for child custody and maintenance. The petitioner claimed to be living in a rented home under unfavorable conditions.

Findings of Court:
The Court laid out detailed conditions for custody and visitation of the children, emphasizing equity in sharing parental responsibilities and rights.

Issues: The main issues were the petitioners' right to reside in the shared household and the appropriateness of custody arrangements for the children.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court recognized the children's rights to maintain relationships with both parents and established a structured plan that allows for shared custody, reinforcing the principle that children should never feel like visitors in their own lives.

Result: Revision petition disposed of with agreed conditions.

Table of Content
1. facts of the case and petition (Para 1)
2. reliefs sought by the petitioner (Para 2)
3. court's observation on child custody (Para 3 , 4)
4. conditions for custody of children (Para 5)
5. agreement and conclusion of the case (Para 6 , 7 , 8)

JUDGMENT

1. The facts, briefly stated, are that, the petitioners approached this Hon'ble Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for invoking the power of superintendence on this Hon'ble High Court to set aside the order dated 16.03.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (Court No.7) Agartala, West Tripura in Misc Case No.2058/2020 arising out of C.R. 128/2020. The petitioners also challenged the order dated 15.09.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No.11 of 2021 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, West Tripura Agartala(Court No.5), whereby the appeal filed by the petitioners was also rejected. The petitioners further seeks a direction upon the respondents to grant the petitioners residential accommodation in the residence of respondent No.1. Under compelling circumstances, petitioner No.1 took a house on rent and she is living there with petitioners No.2 & 3(minor son and daughter). As such, the petitioner No.1 is burdened with the payment of rent from the rented house. The petitioners were living in the rented house without proper furniture, utensils, etc. Situated thus, the petitioners filed a case under Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which was registered as C.R. 128/2020 seeking various reliefs. Respondent No.1 also filed an objection in Misc 2058 of 2020 praying for dismissal of the interim prayer made by the petitioners. Hence, this instant revision petition.

2. In the instant CRP, the petitioner-wife has prayed for the following reliefs:-

' i. Admit this petition

ii. Issue notice upon the respondents;

iii. Call for the relevant records;

iv. After hearing the parties be pleased to set aside the Judgment and Order dated 16.03.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Agartala, West Tripura (Court No.7) in Case No. Misc. 2058 of 2020 and the Order dated 15.09.2021 passed in Crl. Appeal No.11/2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Agartala, West Tripura (Court No.5) and further be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to allow the petitioners to reside in the shared household of the respondent No.1 and further not to obstruct the petitioners from excess to common passage, entrance and further not to deprive the petitioners of water supply, electricity, gas connection etc. After hearing the parties direct the respondent No.1 to pay additional maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month a part from the maintenance of Rs.35,000/- per month for additional expenses incurred by the petitioner.

AND

In the interim, be pleased to stay further proceedings of Case No.C.R. 128 of 2020 pending in the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Agartala, West Tripura (Court No.7) till disposal of the present petition.'

3. Heard Mr. A. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. S. Deb, learned Sr. counsel and Mr. K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. When the case is called, both the learned counsels are present along with their respective clients, namely, Smt. Saheli Dey (Kar Bhowmik), wife-petitioner No.1 and the Sri Shibaji Kar Bhowmik, husband-respondent No.1. The children are also present. In the open Court, this Court discussed with the petitioner-wife and the respondent-husband with regard to the custody of their children in the presence of their respective counsels. This Court suggested to share the custody of the children not on the visitation right of the parent but on the visitation right of the children with the parent in the larger interest of the children since the children cannot be deprived of the love and affection of both the parent. It is needless to say that parents cannot be a guest in the life of the children. Allowing a parent to visit the children occasionally and periodically for few mi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top