- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3045 OF 2024 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SHRI. AKSHAY CHOPRA, AGED 38 YEARS, NO. 901, TOWER 11, L AND T RAIN TREE BOULEAVARD, SAHAKARNAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 092. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SONIA RAJESH, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. SONIA LAL CHANDANI, AGED 34 YEARS, PURVA GRACES APARTMENT, AMRUTHAHALLI VILLAGE, OFF BELLARY RAOD, SAHAKARNAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 092. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SIVARAMAKRISHNAN M.S., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH / SET ASIDE THAT PORTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE AT BENGALURU IN G AND WC NO.269/2023 DATED 13.07.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A, INSOFAR AS ONLY GRANTING CUSTODY TO THE PETITIONER OF HIS MINOR SON MASTER ARJUN CHOPRA ON THE FOLLOWING LIMITED TERMS. Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the father who is a respondent in the custody petition preferred by the mother in G and WC.No.269/2023. Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order passed on I.A.No.V with regard to custody and visitation rights ordered by the learned Family Judge at Bengaluru. 2. The minor child namely Arjun Chopra as on the date of filing of the petition was aged 7 years 4 months and presently he is 8 years of age. The learned Family Judge passed an order on I.A.No.V at the instance of the petitioner-father as under: "I.A.No.V filed u/s 12 of Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 on behalf of respondent is allowed in part. Applicant/respondent is granted interim custody of the minor child Arjun Chopra aged 7 years 4 months as follows: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 1. Every 1st and 3rd Friday from 6 p.m. till Sunday evening 6 p.m. 2. During school declared summer holidays for a period of 15 days. 3. 30% of school declared Dasara vacation and Christmas vacation and 2 days during Diwali vacation. 4. The applicant/respondent is also granted right to talk to the minor child on every Tuesday and Thursday between 6.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. without effecting the child's school activities with his home work." 3. The petitioner-father approached this Court being aggrieved by the impugned order, not satisfied with the number of days given for his custody and visitation rights to take care of the minor child, as the child is comfortable and happy with the father and hence, he wants more time to spend with the minor child, obviously for the well being and welfare of the minor child. 4. This Court by order dated 26.03.2024 after interacting with the minor child and the petitioner and respondent passed an order by modifying the order of the Family Court and granted an additional 4th Saturday visitation - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 rights to spend time with the minor child from morning 10.00 a.m. till evening 5.00 p.m., and retained all other conditions and terms stipulated in the impugned order. 5. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the petitioner-father that some more time and number of days could be granted to the father to spend quality time with the child in the welfare and interest of the child. 6. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondent-mother vehemently objects to the said submissions by contending that, the child is already overloaded with the school activities and other miscellaneous activities and father is already given visitation rights on 1st and 3rd Friday from 6.00 p.m. till Sunday evening 6.00 p.m., so also other conditions stipulated by the Family Court and additionally modified by this Court by granting another extra day i.e., on 4th Saturday from 10.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m., which is justifiable and thereby both the parents i.e., the father and mother would have equal number of days to spend time with a child which is in the interest of the minor child. On these grounds, she seeks dismissal of this petition. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 7. It is submitted by both the learned counsels on record that, the main matter before the Family Court is pending adjudication, evidence is not yet commenced and application is filed by the petitioner-father seeking certain relief for a direction to be given to the respondent-mother to not take the child outside the country. 8. This court is not inclined to pass any order on such application. The Family Court shall deal with the application on its own merits. Nevertheless, it is relevant to mention that the learned counsel for respondent submits that the petitioner- father has been dragging on the proceedings without adducing evidence by filing application one after the other. She also contends that the respondent-mother would not have objection to the application preferred before the Family Court as she is not inclined to take the child out of the country. However, the Family Court shall pass suitable orders on the said application. 9. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent, it would be in the interest of both the parties and minor child that the main petition be disposed of expeditiously on its merits by - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 taking all the contentions of both the parties and of course on the interaction with the minor child by the Family Court. Under the circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this petition. 10. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER (i) This petition is disposed of by modifying the impugned order passed by the Family Court on I.A.No.V as under: a) Every 1st and 3rd Friday from 6 p.m. till Sunday evening 6 p.m. b) During school declared summer holidays for a period of 15 days. c) 30% of school declared Dasara vacation and Christmas vacation and 2 days during Diwali vacation. d) Petitioner-father shall be permitted to speak to the minor child everyday from 7:00 p.m. to 7:20 p.m., without interfering with the child's school activities or other co-curricular activities. e) In case, the child is not permitted to speak during this period i.e., everyday at 7:00 to 7:20 p.m., the respondent - mother shall facilitate alternative time for the same period of 20 minutes everyday. (ii) As per the order passed by this Court on 26.03.2024, petitioner-father shall have custody and visitation - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5210 WP No. 3045 of 2024 rights on 4th Saturday from morning 10.00 a.m. till evening 5.00 p.m. (iii) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the matter. (iv) Parties are at liberty to adduce evidence and proceed further in the matter. (v) The Family Court shall pass suitable orders on the application with regard to travel of the child outside the country, on the application, if any filed by either of the party. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE MCR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18 CT: BHK