The paramount consideration in custody disputes is the welfare of the child, favoring maternal custody for girls over seven, barring harmful circumstances.

ORDER :

1. The instant Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 25.03.2025 in I.A.No.1499 of 2024 in GWOP.No.07 of 2024 passed by the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar (for short ‘the impugned order’)

2. Heard Ms.R. Sandhya Rani, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Nageshwar Rao Pujari, learned counsel for the petitioner; and Mr. K. Janaki Rama Rao, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The relationship between petitioner and respondent herein is that of husband and wife.

4. Vide the impugned order, the Trial Court allowed the above I.A. which was filed by the respondent (wife) under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and granted interim custody of the minor child, viz., Viranshu Varshini Bhaji Ranjith to the respondent within one month from the date of order subject to completion of examinations of the child in school, failing which the respondent would proceed in accordance with law. The Trial Court also granted visitation rights to the petitioner to visit the minor child on 1^st and 3^rd Saturday of every month at the premises of DLSA / MLSA, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh from 02:00 P.M. to 04:30 P.M. until further orders.

5. Initially, the petitioner (husband) filed the above GWOP under Section 25 of the Guardianship & Wards Act read with Section 6 of the Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956 praying the Court to grant Decree of Custody of child to the petitioner.

6. The brief facts leading to filing of the instant Civil Revision Petition are that there appears to be a strained relationship between the petitioner (husband) and the respondent (wife). The marriage between petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 19.10.2013. Out of the said wedlock, a female child was born on 26.08.2016 viz., Viranshu Varshini Bhaji Ranjit, i.e., more than nine years ago. As the relationship between the petitioner and respondent had further got strained, the petitioner and their family members have forcefully brought the respondent to the parental home in January, 2024 and left her there. Meanwhile, the petitioner (husband) filed OP.NO.253 of 2024 seeking for dissolution of marriage and simultaneously the above GWOP was also filed seeking for custody of the girl child. It is in the said GWOP that the respondent (wife) had filed the above I.A., viz., I.A.No.1499 of 2024 in GWOP.No.07 of 2024 seeking for interim custody of the minor girl child, and which was allowed by the Trial Court vide the impugned order which is under challenge in the instant Civil Revision Petition.

7. In the above I.A., the respondent (wife) had categorically stated that she had been forcefully left at her parental home by the petitioner without the company of her daughter and without heeding to the respondent’s request to take along her daughter to the parental home. It is the further contention of the respondent that the girl child is at a growing age and is aged around nine years. She, therefore, contended that it would be more appropriate if the custody of the girl child is given to the respondent. The respondent also made a statement that she is in the capacity to take care of the girl child and also the child’s needs including that of giving best of education. Meanwhile, the respondent also stated that the above GWOP had been filed by the petitioner on the basis of false, fabricated and baseless allegations.

8. On the other hand, the petitioner in the course of filing of the above GWOP had tried to assassinate the character of respondent by