Advocates:
['VANDANA KUMARI', '', 'ABHIMANYU SHARMA', 'M K BHARDWAJ SR ADV', 'PARVEEN KUMAR', '', 'GAGAN BASOTRA', 'VISHAL BHARTI', 'DY AG', 'R MEHTA', 'AAG']

Serial No. 234

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

OW104 No. 38/2016

IA No. 1/2016

Rajeev Gupta …Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

Through:- Mrs. Surinder Kour, Sr. Advocate

with Assisting Counsel.

v/s

Sangeeta Gupta …Respondent(s)

Through:- None.

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE

ORDER

1.

The petitioner has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this

Court in the instant petition while throwing challenge to order dated

19.03.2016 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge (Matrimonial

Cases), Jammu in case titled as ‘Rajeev Gupta v/s Sangeeta Gupta’.

2.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the petition

under Section 25 read with Section 12 of Guardians and Wards Act came to

be filed by the petitioner for returning the custody of the minor children

claimed under the custody of the respondent as also for grant of

interlocutory order for production of minor and interim protection of his

person and property. According to the learned counsel in terms of order

dated 04.12.2012, the petitioner was allowed to meet the minor children on

2 OW104 No. 38/2016

alternate Sunday i.e. from 3 P.M. to 6 P.M. in winter and from 4 P.M. to 7

P.M. in summers. The petitioner was allowed to take the children from the

house of respondent and drop them back on the scheduled time. According

to the learned counsel for the petitioner the order dated 04.12.2012 was

challenged by the respondent before this Court by way of an appeal being

CIMA No. 500/2012 which, however, came to be dismissed on 20.12.2012.

A petition under Section 104 of the Constitution of J&K is also stated to

have been filed by the respondent being No. 64/2012 which, however, came

to be withdrawn on 05.03.2013.

3.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner during the

pendency of the petition before the court below, an order came to be passed

on 11.11.2013, providing therein that the children are not willing to meet the

father. The said order is stated to have been questioned by the petitioner in a

revision petition before this Court being No. 83/2013 wherein while

disposing of the same, this Court on 18.12.2014 allowed the petitioner to

meet the minor children in terms of the arrangement made by the court

below directing the court below to execute the order and ensure that the

petitioner meets the minor children. It has also been provided in the order

that the court below shall ensure that the minor children are produced before

it on 29.12.2014 by the mother and that in case, there is any difficulty in

enforcing the order, the assistance of the police may be availed.

4.

According to the learned counsel the children were not

produced before the court below on 29.12.2014 in compliance to the order

passed by this Court compelling the petitioner to file an application before

3 OW104 No. 38/2016

the court below for implementation of the order passed by this Court on

18.12.2014 as also for execution of initial order passed by the court below

on 04.12.2012.

5.

According to the learned counsel the court below passed an

order on 19.03.2016 while disposing of the application of the petitioner

providing therein that the non-applicant-mother shall make all endeavours to

persuade the children to have meeting/interaction with the father and also

provided that the p