* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

&

*THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN

+C.M.A.No.247 OF 2023

% 10.04.2025

# Suryas Ravi Prakash Rao

……Appellant

And:

$ Mohithe Manohar Rao and

others

….Respondents.

!Counsel for the appellant : Sri K.P. Abhiram

^Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 : Sri Vivekananda Virupaksha

>Head Note:

? Cases referred:

1 (2019) 7 SCC 42 2 2001 (3) ALD 454

3 2014 SCC OnLine Raj 140

4 AIR 1935 Mad 195 5 (2010) 2 SCC 654 6 (2009) 7 SCC 322

7 1984 AIR 469

8 (2008) 9 SCC 413 9 (2009) 7 SCC 322

10..2015 10 SCC 1

11.(2020) SCC (online) SC 887

12 (1992) 3 SCC 573 13.(2020) 3 SCC 67

14. 2012 SCC OnLine Mad 5094 15. 2023 SCC OnLine All 4233

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * *

C.M.A.No.247 OF 2023 DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 10.04.2025 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI &

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN 1. Whether Reporters of Local Yes/No newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may Yes/No be marked to Law Reporters/Journals

3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see Yes/No the fair copy of the Judgment?

____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J _______________________

CHALLA GUNARANJAN,J THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI &

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN C.M.A.No.247 OF 2023 JUDGMENT: per the Hon‟ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari:

1. Heard Sri K.P. Abhiram, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Vivekananda Virupaksha, learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3.

FACTS:

2. This appeal under Section 47 of the Guardian & Wards Act, 1890 (for short, the G.W.Act, 1890) has been filed by the appellant-father of the minor son Chi. Suryas Srivatsav (in short „Ward‟) seeking his custody under Sections 9, 10 and 23 of the G.W.Act, 1890, from the respondents‟ custody, being aggrieved from the order of rejection of his petition G.W.O.P.No.13 of 2020 by order dated 12.12.2022 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram.

3. The respondents 1 to 3 are the maternal grandfather, grandmother and uncle of the ward respectively.

4. The appellant was married to late Jyothi Manohar. Out of their wedlock, the son Chi Suryas Srivatsav was born. On

04.09.2017, in an incident at the appellant‟s home, his wife died, during treatment in Chandra Hospital. The respondents registered Crime No.146 of 2017 of IV Town Police Station, Ananthapuram under Sections 498-A, 302 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC against the appellant and his parents. It is the appellant‟s case that the respondents took away the Ward on pretext and against the wish. The ward was under forceful control and custody of the respondents. The appellant approached the respondents, but they did not give custody. The ward was being deprived of the love, affection and care of the appellant-father. He was falsely implicated in the case of death of his wife alleging it to be murder though it was a case of suicide. The appellant filed the G.W.O.P.No.13 of 2020 for custody of the ward submitting inter alia that the welfare of the ward was with the appellant.

5. The 1^st respondent filed counter. The same was adopted by the respondents 2 and 3. They admitted the relationship. However, they submitted that there was demand of dowry, harassment to the wife, physical and mental, and that she was murdered. The appellant neglected the welfare of the ward. The Sessions Case No.207 of 2018 on the file of IV Additional District & Sessions Judge (Mahila Court) was pending against the appellant and his parents. The ward deposed against the father. The appellant assaulted the minor and his conduct was to eliminate the child who was the only eye witness of the incident. The endeavour of the appellant was to stop the ward from deposing against him. The appellant never approached the respondents to take care of the ward or to know his welfare and wellbeing.

6. The respondents further pleaded that they admitted the child in Euro School, White Field, Bangalore in 1^st Grade and that, (at the time of filing res