IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN &

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA TUESDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 6TH PHALGUNA, 1946 OP (FC) NO. 72 OF 2025 ORDER DATED 21.12.2024 IN IA 2/2024 IN OP NO.558 OF 2024, FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

RAHUL K.R, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. K RAGHAVAN, HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT AKSHAYA, KELATHODI, K.V ROAD PALAPPURAM VILLAGE, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD-679103 NOW RESIDING AT 15B NANMA SCARLET, EDACHIRA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682030.

BY ADVS. M.S.LETHA SAJID P.S.

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

ANJU MOHAN, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O MOHANAN K.V., KANNOTHU HOUSE, THRIVENI JUNCTION, ALLAPRA P.O.

VENGOLA KARA, VENGOLA VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, PIN – 683556.

BY ADV RUBY V J THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

We propose to write this judgment incorporating as few details as is possible, since the parties are in consent.

2. The petitioner – father sought overnight custody of his five year old daughter, which was resisted by the respondent – wife, saying that a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (‘POCSO Act’, for short) had been slapped against him.

3. However, the Police now report that the above case has been found to be false; but the respondent asserts that she has filed a protest complaint, which is now listed before the Special Court for POCSO cases, on 28.02.2025.

4. However, Smt.V.J.Ruby - learned counsel for the respondent, concedes unequivocally that the child can be allowed to be with the father every day during the day time, as also on every Saturday. She offered that this can be done, by the father picking her up from the school and dropping her at 6 p.m. at the residence of her client; and as regards the Saturdays, she offered that the father can pick up the child from the front of the residential gate of her client at 10 a.m., and drop her back by 5 p.m.

at the same place.

5. Smt.Letha M.S. - learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that, until such time as the protest complaint is also found false against her client, he is willing to accede to the afore interim custody suggestion.

In the afore circumstances, with the express consent of both sides, we allow this Original Petition and modify Ext.P4 order, thus permitting the petitioner to be in interim custody of the child after school hours every day until 6 p.m. as far as the weekdays are concerned; and from 10 a.m. till 4 p.m. on Saturdays.

The place of exchange of the child, for the purpose of the weekends and for return on weekdays, shall be in front of the residential gate of the respondent – mother.

We, however, clarify that we have not entered into the merits of any of the rival contentions of the parties, especially qua the allegations which have led to the POCSO case, thus leaving to the appropriate Court to deal with it as per law.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/-

M.B.SNEHALATHA akv JUDGE APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 72/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PLAINT IN 0 P NO.

558/2024 OF FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE I.A 2/24 IN OP NO.558/24 OF FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT TO I.A NO.2/2024 0P NO.558/24 OF FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A 2/24 IN OP NO.558/24 OF FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA.DATED 21.12.2024 EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE LNFOPARK POLICE IN CRIME NO.426/24 .

EXHIBIT P6 THE COPY OF THE PETITION IN MC NO.23/24 OF JFCM COURT , KAKKANADU.

EXHIBIT P7 THE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED

25/5/2024 EXHIBIT P8 THE COPY OF THE ORDER OF DISTRICT &

SESSIONS COURT(POCSO) PASSED IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION.

EXHIBIT P9 THE PRINT OUT OF WHATSUP CHATS BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT DATED 19/2/2024, 4/4/2024 AND

23/4/2024 EXHIBIT P10 THE PRINT OUT OF WHATSUP COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE EARLIER LAWYER OF TH