In child custody disputes, the welfare and best interest of the child is the paramount consideration. While allegations of an illicit relationship alone are insufficient to deny custody, such conduct combined with consistent parental neglect provides a valid basis for adjusting custodial arrangements to protect the child's developmental environment.

J U D G E M E N T

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR J.

1. The present Appeal has been preferred under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the Order dated 08.07.2025¹Impugned Order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court 02, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi²Family Court., in Guardianship Petition No. 127/2023, titled ‘Dipender Nath v. Karuna Nath’.

2. By the Impugned Order, the learned Family Court, in exercise of its powers under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890³GW Act, granted interim custody of the minor child to the Respondent-Father until the disposal of the petition, while confining the Appellant-Mother’s visitation to every Sunday from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Children’s Room, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

BRIEF FACTS:

3. The marriage between the Appellant-Mother and Respondent-Father was solemnized on 17.02.2020 at Samuday Bhawan, Nangloi, Delhi. From the said wedlock, a male child, Master Divyansh Nath, was born on 25.01.2021.

4. During the course of cohabitation, matrimonial discord arose between the parties, as a result of which they have been living separately since 27.10.2023.

5. It is alleged that the Appellant-Mother, on certain occasions, left the matrimonial home without prior intimation, leaving the child unattended. In one such incident, the Respondent, along with the Appellant’s mother, lodged a missing complaint on 30.03.2023, which was registered as GD No. 0142A at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi. The Respondent-Father has further alleged that the Appellant maintained a relationship with one Amit Bhardwaj, which, according to him, aggravated the discord between the parties.

6. On the premise that the Appellant was neglecting her parental responsibilities, the Respondent-Father sought custody of the minor child. As the Appellant did not accede to his request, the Respondent instituted Guardianship Petition No. 127/2023 under Section 25 of GW Act before the learned Family Court seeking permanent custody of the minor child. Along with the petition, an application under Section 12 of the GW Act was also filed, seeking interim custody of the child.

7. In support of his petition, the Respondent-Father alleged that the Appellant was involved in extraneous relationships beyond the marriage and, in pursuit thereof, neglected the welfare of the child. He further relied upon certain photographs purportedly showing the minor child sleeping unattended on a pull cart in an open area.

8. The record of proceedings before the learned Family Court shows that the Appellant did not regularly participate in the case. Her repeated non-appearance led to the issuance of non-bailable warrants and, eventually, publication orders to secure her presence. The Order dated 28.04.2025, appended to the present appeal, records the following:

“At 10:30 a.m.

Present: Petitioner with Ms. Preeti Srivastava, Ld. counsel.

Ms. Simran Aggarwal, Ld. counsel for respondent.

Ld. counsel for respondent is directed to ask the respondent to appear before this Court along with minor children at 12:30 p.m.

Matter is passed-over for 12:30 p.m.

At 12:50 p.m.

Present: Petitioner with Ms. Preeti Srivastava, Ld. counsel.

None for respondent.

Despite directions of this Court, respondent has not appeared and even she has not brought the minor children.

On the last date of hearing, concerned SH