- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18668 WP No. 13838 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 13838 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: MR ANINDYA GUPTA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O. APURBA GUPTA, R/A: NO-402, CELESTIA TOWER LODHA AURUM GRANDE KANJURMARG EAST BOMBAY-400 042 MOB: 9769418844 E-MAIL: ANINDYA.A.GUPPTA@GMAIL.COM …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MANJUNATH H, ADVOCATE) AND: MRS TANIYA DAS AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, D/O. ANUP KUMAR DAS, R/A:NO 105 MAPLE APARTMENT, 80 FEET ROAD 4TH B CROSS, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE- 560038 MOB: 9920640610 E-MAIL: TANYADAS27@GMAIL.COM …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MADAN GOPAL M, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 25.04.2025 IN I.A.NO.12 IN G AND WC NO. 35/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE III ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BANGALORE i.e. ANNX-A AND ETC. Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18668 WP No. 13838 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the order passed on I.A.No.12 in G&WC No.35/2022, dated 25.04.2025 by the III Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, wherein the Family Court had granted child visitation to the father from 05.05.2025 to 09.05.2025 and from 12.05.2025 to 17.05.2025 between 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. in a calm and peaceful manner. The respondent/mother was directed to hand over the custody of the children to the petitioner/father between 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. on the dates mentioned above, to enable the petitioner to spend time with the children without causing any disturbance or interference in any manner. Furthermore, it was directed that the petitioner/father take care of the children, keeping constant supervision over them and meeting their needs, considering their welfare and its consequences. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18668 WP No. 13838 of 2025 2. Though it is submitted that it should not be under the supervision of the mother, when it comes to the order dated 13.05.2025 passed by this Court, the Court had only recorded the submission of the respondent that the Director of the Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, to be directed to supervise the presence of the children. Accordingly, the respondent/mother was directed to keep the minor children present before the Director, Mediation Centre, Bengaluru, between 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on 13.05.2025 and 14.05.2025, and the matter was directed to be listed on 15.05.2025. On 15.05.2025, this Court made a similar arrangement on 16.05.2025, 17.05.2025 and 19.05.2025 to 23.05.2025. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the writ petition is filed only with regard to the visitation during the summer, as such the petition has become infructuous. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that, having obtained an order, except on 16.05.2025 and 17.05.2025, the petitioner/father has not come to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18668 WP No. 13838 of 2025 Mediation Centre/Child Visitation Centre to visit the children on other dates. The respondent/mother went to the Centre along with the two children and was made to wait without giving any information. 5. In response to that, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mother had blocked the number of the father. He had in fact sent the e-mail and communicated that he is not in a position to visit the children between 19.05.2025 to 23.05.2025. The same was denied by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, stating that the e-mail was not received by the respondent-mother. 6. This Court, at this stage, cannot go into all these facts, whether such an e-mail was received by them or not. As far as the writ petition is concerned, as it pertains to the summer vacation and that period is over. No further adjudication is required in this writ petition. 7. Coming to the submission with regard to lapses on the part of the father, this Court is not inclined to go into those aspects. The petitioner and the respondent are at liberty to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18668 WP No. 13838 of 2025 agitate before the Family Court and the Family Court shall consider the same on the merits of it. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo stating that the instant petition may be disposed of by keeping open all the contentions and the same is taken on record. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KTY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23