##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:23640]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10560/2026

Sunil Kumar Mali S/o Gopa Ram Mali, Aged About 31 Years,

Resident Of Bera Bavoda, Nehra Bera, Sojat City, District Pali.

----Petitioner

Versus

Varsha Gehlot W/o Sunil Kumar Mali D/o Shri Bhanwar Lal

Gehlot, Aged About 31 Years, Resident Of Jai Shree Digital Photo

Studio, Near Brahamchari Ji Ki Bageechi, Mathaniya Choraha,

Tinwari, District Jodhpur, Rajathan.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar, petitioner in person

For Respondent(s) : -

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order

16/05/2026

1. The petitioner, who is present in person, submits that his

marriage with the respondent was solemnized in the year 2017

and out of the said wedlock, a daughter was born in the year

2018. It is further submitted that in the year 2020, the

respondent-wife left the matrimonial home along with the minor

daughter and started residing separately from the petitioner.

2. It is submitted that thereafter, in the year 2025, the

petitioner instituted a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 before the learned Additional District Judge,

Sojat City, District Pali seeking restitution of conjugal rights and

also filed an application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage

Act, 1955 for grant of visitation rights qua the minor daughter.

The learned Additional District Judge, Sojat City, vide order dated

(Uploaded on 16/05/2026 at 12:09:48 PM)

(Downloaded on 18/05/2026 at 08:33:00 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:23640] (2 of 3) [CW-10560/2026]

07.02.2026, granted limited visitation rights to the petitioner

permitting him to meet his daughter every Sunday from 10:00

a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the residence of the respondent.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the

specific directions issued by the learned trial Court, when the

petitioner visited the residence of the respondent on Sunday to

meet his daughter, the respondent did not comply with the order

dated 07.02.2026 and the petitioner was not permitted to meet

the child. It is further submitted that the petitioner thereafter filed

an application seeking compliance of the order dated 07.02.2026;

however, the same has not yet been considered and is still

pending before the learned trial Court. It is also submitted that on

the subsequent Sunday, when the petitioner again visited the

residence of the respondent to meet his daughter, he was once

again denied visitation. Consequently, the petitioner filed another

application dated 28.03.2026 seeking strict compliance of the

order dated 07.02.2026.

4. The petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if a

direction may be issued to the learned Additional District Judge,

Sojat City, District Pali to consider and decide the petitioner’s

application seeking compliance of the order dated 07.02.2026

expeditiously.

5. In view of the limited prayer made by the petitioner, the

present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned

Additional District Judge, Sojat City, District Pali to consider and

decide the petitioner’s application seeking compliance of the order

dated 07.02.2026 within a period of four weeks from the date of

(Uploaded on 16/05/2026 at 12:09:48 PM)

(Downloaded on 18/05/2026 at 08:33:00 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:23640] (3 of 3) [CW-10560/2026]

receipt of a certified copy of this order, strictly in accordance with

law.

6. It is made clear that the aforesaid direction has been issued

only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of the petitioner’s

grievance and the same shall not be construed as an expression of

opinion on the merits of the case or as a direction to decide the

application in a particular manner.

7. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also

stand disposed of.

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J

8-Ramesh/-

(Uploaded on 16/05/2026 at 12:09:48 PM)

(Downloaded on 18/05/2026 at 08:33:00 PM)