MAT.APP.(F.C.) 132/2020

Page 1 of 39

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 28^th July, 2023

Pronounced on: 11^th October, 2023

+

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 132/2020 & CM APPL. 27875/2020 (for direction),

CM APPL. 4975/2021 (for additional documents), CM APPL.

21862/2021 (for interim custody), CM APPL. 32875/2021(for interim

custody) & CM APPL. 37930/2021 (under Section 12 of the Family

Courts Act, 1984 read with Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act

read with Section 151 CPC)

SUGANDHI AGGARWAL

..... Appellant

Through:

Appellant in-person

versus

COL. RAMNEESH PAL SINGH

..... Respondent

Through:

Respondent in-person

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

JUDGMENT

AMIT SHARMA, J.

1.

The present appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984

has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment dated 22.08.2020

passed by Sh. Rakesh Syal, Learned Judge, Family Courts, West, Tis Hazari

Digitally Signed

By:RANJU BHALLA

Signing Date:11.10.2023

15:21:05

Signature Not Verified

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 132/2020

Page 2 of 39

Courts in GP No. 45/17 (Old GP No. 75/2015) titled „Smt. Sugandhi

Aggarwal Vs. Colonel Ramneesh Pal Singh‟. Vide the impugned judgment,

the learned Family Court, granted permanent custody of the minor children to

the Respondent-father, and provided visitation rights to the present appellant.

Submissions of the Appellant/Sugandhi Aggarwal

2.

It is the case of the appellant that the marriage between the appellant

and respondent was solemnized on 22.12.2002 at Delhi, in accordance with

Hindu/Sikh rites and ceremonies. Out of the said wedlock, the parties have

two minor children, one daughter namely, „SSU‟ aged about 14 and a son

namely, „SSH‟ aged about 10 (as referred to in the impugned judgment). In

December 2013, the respondent was promoted to the rank of Colonel and was

supposed to be posted at Jammu and Kashmir. Therefore, it was mutually

decided between the parties to shift the appellant and the children

permanently to Delhi.

3.

The appellant further submitted that on the night of 08.08.2015, when

the respondent visited the household premises at Delhi, certain differences

arose between the parties in the presence of their family members with regard

to the alleged character of the present appellant. Upon the occurrence of the

said incident, the appellant left the premises for a night. On the next day,

when she visited the house, she found it locked and the respondent and the

minor children were not available at the premises. Thereafter, the appellant

filed a missing children report on 19.08.2015 as well as a petition under

Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 on

17.08.2015.

4.

The appellant submitted that she subsequently learnt that the

respondent was staying with the children at Gulmarg, Kashmir and was soon

Digitally Signed

By:RANJU BHALLA

Signing Date:11.10.2023

15:21:05

Signature Not Verified

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 132/2020

Page 3 of 39

going to shift to Bikaner, Rajasthan. The appellant alleged that the respondent

had abducted their minor children, which caused them trauma, owing to the

respondent‟s unnatural and irrational behavior. Therefore, a guardianship

petition was filed by the appellant seeking custody of the minor children of

the parties before the learned Family Court, which was disposed of by the

learned Family Court in terms of the impugned judgment dated 22.08.2020.

The learned Family Court directed as follows:

“16.1 In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is directed that the

permanent custody of minor children SSU and SSH shall remain with the

respondent. However, the petitioner shall be entitled to have interaction

with the minor children daily through audio-video call for half an hour,

between 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM. The respondent s