Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28879 (KAR)

MR. VISHEN VINAY KUMAR v. SMT. DEESHMA G

WP/17004/2025 · 2025-06-16

Lalitha Kanneganti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20597 WP No. 17004 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 17004 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: MR. VISHEN VINAY KUMAR, S/O VINAY KUMAR P.K., AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.1086 APPUS DEN BEHIND RAILWAY LINE ASHOK THEATER, BROTHERS COLONY, CHIKKABANAVARA , BANGALORE - 560 090. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. RAJ PRABHU, ADVOCATE) AND: MRS. DEESHMA G, D/O GOPALAKRISHNA K, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT NO.47, NANDHANAM, PUTTARAJU LAYOUT, KALKERE VILLAGE, BANNERGATTA, BENGALURU - 560 083. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RASHMI GEORGE, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.06.2025 PASSED IN G AND WC NO.42/2025 IA U/S 25(1) AND (2) OF GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT 1890 ON THE FILE OF THE 4TH ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT VIDE ANNEXURE –A AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20597 WP No. 17004 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the orders passed on I.A. filed under Section 25(1) & (2) of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 dated 10.06.2025 by the Court of VII Addl. Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, the father is before this Court. 2. The mother has filed G & W.C.No.42/2025 seeking custody of the child. It is her case that till 17.04.2025 both the parties were residing together and on 17.04.2025, without the notice of the mother, the father had taken the child which made her to approach the Family Court by filing the G&WC petition and the Court had passed the order impugned directing the father to return the custody of the 3 year old minor to the mother. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ husband submits that the husband has made certain allegations against the wife with regard to the conduct and how she is living a adulterous life and he also placed before the Court some of the photographs and the WhatsApp conversation and it - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20597 WP No. 17004 of 2025 is submitted that it is not in the welfare of the child to stay along with the mother. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/mother submits that now unless and until an application is filed before the Court though under Section 65B of the Information Technology Act, the same cannot be considered by the Court and it will be considered at the time of trial. At this stage, there cannot be any observation on that. Further how the welfare of the child is affected is also one of the issue that has to be dealt with by the Court. 5. When the matter came up before the Court on 13.06.2025, this Court had interacted with the parties and the Court had passed an order that first the child has to be handed over to the mother as per the order of the Family Court and the mother shall not precipitate the execution proceedings and then this Court will hear the matter on the merits. Today, this Court has heard both the counsels. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the mother with regard to the adulterous life and other allegations that are made by the father against the mother, cannot be decided by this Court at - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20597 WP No. 17004 of 2025 this stage and admittedly both the parties were staying together till 17.04.2025. Considering the age of the boy, the custody that is granted by the Court to the mother, this Court do not find any reasons to interfere. When this Court had interacted with the parents and also seen the boy, the boy is happy with the mother and he is also attached to the father. The boy requires company of the father equally. Though no application is filed before this Court with regard to visitation and all, this Court exercising the parens patria jurisdiction in the interest of both the parties, considers it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER (i) On every Friday, the father shall pick up the child from the School and again shall drop the child back to the mother on Sunday evening by 5 'o' clock and during the stay, the father has to take care of all the requirements of the child with regard to curricular and extracurricular. If the child or the mother wants to speak, father shall allow the child to speak. (ii) Both the parents shall ensure that they do not speak ill of the other parent and any violation from any of the parties will be considered very seriously. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20597 WP No. 17004 of 2025 Family Court shall pass appropriate orders, if any violation is brought to the notice of the Court. (iii) On child's birthday and any important festival in the family or in the religion, on that day, the father shall have the visitation. The first half shall be with the mother i.e., till 1 ‘o’ clock and second half shall be with the father and by 7 ‘o’ clock, the boy shall be send back to the mother. (iv) During the Summer Vacation, first 50% of the vacation shall be with the father and the second 50% of the vacation custody shall be with the mother. (v) The same arrangement as in Clause (iv) will apply to the Dasara and Winter Vacation also. From the second day of any vacation, 50% of the vacation shall be counted. (vi) During the 50% of the vacation or on any other days, the non custodial parent shall have the access for video/audio calls once in a day. (vii) In this order any particular aspect on visitation is not considered, both the parties are at liberty to seek the relief from the court without altering the existing arrangement. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20597 WP No. 17004 of 2025 (viii) Both the parties who are present before the Court have accepted for the above arrangements made by this Court. (ix) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of and the Family Court shall consider the G & W.C. in accordance with law. (x) All IAs., in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE KA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31 Ct: sn