ORDER

1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against order dated 17.5.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Satna in MJC No.GW/09/2022, by which order dated 7.11.2023 has been partially modified and the main grievance of the petitioner has been addressed by the Trial Court.

2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that in a proceeding initiated under the Guardian and Wards Act, visiting rights were granted by the Trial Court by order dated 7.11.2023. However, it was also observed by the Trial Court that visiting rights shall be subject to wishes of the child. Accordingly, the petitioner had filed W.P.No.29465/2023 which was disposed of by order dated 21.2.2024, thereby granting liberty to the petitioner to revisit the Family Court expressing constrains and difficulties being faced by the petitioner / father to exercise his visitation rights granted to him by impugned order. Accordingly, the petitioner revisited the Family Court and now, by the impugned order dated 17.5.2024 the Trial Court has deleted the condition of wishes of the child.

3. Challenging the order passed by the Court below, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that period of six hours granted to the petitioner to visit his child is too short. In fact, the petitioner wants custody of the child so that he can protect welfare of his child.

4. Considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner.

5. Primary question for consideration is as to whether the challenge of the order dated 17.5.2024 passed by the Court below on merits can be permitted or not?

6. As already pointed out, the Court had granted visiting rights by order dated 7.11.2023 and the said order was challenged by the petitioner by filing W.P.No.29465/2023. While arguing the said writ petition, a solitary contention was raised by counsel for the petitioner that “condition of making visiting rights subject to wish and desire of the child is not only impracticable but also renders impugned order inexecutable. It is submitted that child is residing with the mother since 12.11.2022 and therefore, can very well be tutored by mother dissuading child from meeting the father thereby rendering the entire order granting visitation rights a nullity.”

7. The said submission was considered by Division Bench of this Court and without setting aside the order dated 7.11.2023; the petitioner was granted a liberty to revisit the Family Court. Now, the Family Court has deleted the condition of “wish and desire of the child” and visiting rights of the petitioner which were granted by order dated 7.11.2023 have been maintained.

8. So far as the other conditions imposed in order dated 7.11.2023 are concerned, the same were never challenged by the petitioner during his arguments in W.P.No.29465/2023 or in other words, it can be safely said that the petitioner had abandoned his challenge to the other conditions of the order. The petitioner cannot be allowed to reopen the case again and again by visiting the courts as per his wishes and desires. Since, the condition which according to the petitioner was impracticable and inexecutable has already been deleted by the Family Court, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that whatever was prayed by the petitioner has been granted to him and accordingly, no case is made out warranting interference.

9. The petition fails and is hereby dismissed (G. S. AHLUWALIA )

JUDGE J PI ATE RN OD UR HA A KUMAR DD2ps3De. AoiN a5 rg s Dti.:4 ai et tc 9al. :a 2 N = l 2l C0I ,u 0y N o= cm 2 s, nda 4io b=e6g .= 0=5 eJn 8IH r04e T= .f8 0Id E9G 62 9N cb 2H 0 d D17y 9 6C 3R1J 6 :O 7AI 5,T 4 8s 7 UE KbtD :NR = 4U9 3T 6MD 6 ME 2O +R a AA 05dF R1 51 hMK 5 'P2y 3U 6A Aa 08M 0 D R'P0 FOA rH9 5aR U6Y Ed aA H8P ec 1 A AsP0hR 1R 3,O aA 0bUD E1HEb CSA fH F0 51, Ao9 Bue0=b EP C7R6 5INf6C Ef BIcP6A5 6L2 B fB 78E 89N 03 3Cc6H E3 5I2N F4Da 1O2 0fR6 4E4 0,a 25 Ba 1, 9 14 JP