IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 138 Aditi Sharma Rahul Sharma CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA, J. of the Constitution of India (Annexure P1) passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal, in case No.GW/98/2023 titled as “Aditi Sharma Vs. Rahul Sharma” whereby the application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act and Sect of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act seeking the minor daughter 2. the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P1), minor girl child being a minor girl child of the petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Vs. Rahul Sharma HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Jaskaran Singh, Advocate Ms. Gurpalak Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. *** NIDHI GUPTA, J. The wife has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside order dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P1) passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal, in case No.GW/98/2023 titled as “Aditi Sharma Vs. Rahul Sharma” whereby the application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act and Sect of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act seeking the daughter, has been dismissed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P1), minor girl child is aged only about 6 years. being a minor girl child of aged only 6 years, she should be in the custody of the petitioner/mother as the same would be in her best interest. Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-2011-2025(O&M) Date of decision: 01.04.2025 ...Petitioner(s) ...Respondent(s) MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA , Advocate with , Advocate resent petition under Article 227 for setting aside order dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P1) passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal, in case No.GW/98/2023 titled as “Aditi Sharma Vs. Rahul Sharma” whereby the application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act and Section 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act seeking the interim custody of It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P1), is unsustainable as the aged only about 6 years. Learned counsel submits that , she should be in the custody of as the same would be in her best interest. It is further 3 resent petition under Article 227 for setting aside order dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P1) passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal, in case No.GW/98/2023 titled as “Aditi Sharma Vs. Rahul Sharma” whereby the ion 13 custody of It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Learned counsel submits that , she should be in the custody of It is further SUNENA 2025.04.07 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document submitted that vide the to meet the child on every 2 hours from 4 pm to 6 pm the said order. It is on the character of the petitioner. It is order be set aside custody of the minor daughter may be all 3. 4. 5. was married to the respondent on 08.12.2015. between the parties. daughter who is mentally challenged, is in the care and custody of the petitioner; and the second elder daughter is living with the respondent/father since separation. started living separately since 15.11.2023 agreed to share the custody. Then the petitioner filed 7, 10, 12, 17 and 25 of the 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P2) seeking custody of the accompanied by an appl Act and Section 13 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P4) submitted that vide the impugned order, the petitioner was also permitted to meet the child on every 2nd and 4th Saturday hours from 4 pm to 6 pm. However, the respondent is not complying with the said order. It is further submitted that the respondent has cast aspersions on the character of the petitioner. It is accordingly prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the application filed by the petitioner seeking custody of the minor daughter may be allowed for the above said reasons. No other argument is made on behalf of the I have heard learned counsel Perusal of the record of the case shows that the petitioner married to the respondent on 08.12.2015. between the parties. 2 daughters were born out of their wedlock. daughter who is mentally challenged, is in the care and custody of the and the second elder daughter is living with the father since separation. Due to matrimonial discord, the parties started living separately since 15.11.2023. Initially both the parents had agreed to share the custody. Then the petitioner filed 7, 10, 12, 17 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act read with Sections 6 and 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P2) seeking custody of the daughter, who is in the custody of the respondent accompanied by an application under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act and Section 13 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P4) impugned order, the petitioner was also permitted Saturday in Bal Bhawan, Karnal for 2 . However, the respondent is not complying with further submitted that the respondent has cast aspersions accordingly prayed that the impugned and the application filed by the petitioner seeking interim owed for the above said reasons. made on behalf of the petitioner. arned counseland perused the case file. Perusal of the record of the case shows that the petitioner married to the respondent on 08.12.2015. It was a love marriage 2 daughters were born out of their wedlock. One daughter who is mentally challenged, is in the care and custody of the and the second elder daughter is living with the Due to matrimonial discord, the parties . Initially both the parents had agreed to share the custody. Then the petitioner filed petition under Sections and Wards Act read with Sections 6 and 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P2) seeking daughter, who is in the custody of the respondent; ication under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act and Section 13 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P4) 3 impugned order, the petitioner was also permitted for 2 . However, the respondent is not complying with further submitted that the respondent has cast aspersions accordingly prayed that the impugned interim Perusal of the record of the case shows that the petitioner It was a love marriage One daughter who is mentally challenged, is in the care and custody of the and the second elder daughter is living with the Due to matrimonial discord, the parties . Initially both the parents had petition under Sections and Wards Act read with Sections 6 and 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P2) seeking ; ication under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act and Section 13 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (Annexure P4) SUNENA 2025.04.07 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document seeking interim custody. 30.05.2024 (Annexure P3) (Annexure P5) to the above said application therein raised by the petitioner in her petition and application. 6. Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal h with the minor girl child in the The learned Family Court has observed that although the minor girl child had interacted peacefully with her mother, however, she more comfortable with her father/respondent. Court had permitted the petitioner to meet the child on at Bal Bhawan, Karnal for 2 hours from 4 pm to 6 pm. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said direction has not been complied with. However, it is also simultaneously admitted by the petitioner that said fact has 7. just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Present petition accordingly stands 8. 01.04.2025 Sunena Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: seeking interim custody. The respondent filed written statement dated 30.05.2024 (Annexure P3) to the main petition; and reply dated (Annexure P5) to the above said application inter alia denying the allegations therein raised by the petitioner in her petition and application. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal has recorded that the Court had met with the minor girl child in the chamber in the presence of both the parents. The learned Family Court has observed that although the minor girl child had interacted peacefully with her mother, however, she more comfortable with her father/respondent. Court had permitted the petitioner to meet the child on at Bal Bhawan, Karnal for 2 hours from 4 pm to 6 pm. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said direction has not been complied with. However, it is also simultaneously admitted by the petitioner said fact has not been brought to the notice of the In view of the above facts, I find the impugned order to be just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Present petition accordingly stands dismissed. Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No The respondent filed written statement dated to the main petition; and reply dated 30.05.2024 inter alia denying the allegations therein raised by the petitioner in her petition and application. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned as recorded that the Court had met chamber in the presence of both the parents. The learned Family Court has observed that although the minor girl child had interacted peacefully with her mother, however, she had appeared to be more comfortable with her father/respondent. Accordingly, learned Family Court had permitted the petitioner to meet the child on 2nd and 4th Saturday at Bal Bhawan, Karnal for 2 hours from 4 pm to 6 pm. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said direction has not been complied with. However, it is also simultaneously admitted by the petitioner not been brought to the notice of the learned Family Court. In view of the above facts, I find the impugned order to be just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Present cation(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. (Nidhi Gupta) Judge 3 The respondent filed written statement dated 4 inter alia denying the allegations Perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned as recorded that the Court had met chamber in the presence of both the parents. The learned Family Court has observed that although the minor girl child had o be Accordingly, learned Family Saturday at Bal Bhawan, Karnal for 2 hours from 4 pm to 6 pm. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said direction has not been complied with. However, it is also simultaneously admitted by the petitioner . In view of the above facts, I find the impugned order to be just and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. Present SUNENA 2025.04.07 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document