[2025:RJ-JP:5075] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19718/2024 Monika Soni D/o Late Shri Ramesh Chand Soni, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Baksi Ji Ki Kothi, House No. 166, Gali No. 2, Agra Gate, Ajmer District Ajmer (Raj). ----Petitioner Versus Manish Soni S/o Shri Rajendra Soni @ Kailash Soni, Aged About 41 Years, R/o House No. 1/243, Old Housing Board, Ward No. 22, Near Vikas General Store, Madanganj Kishangarh, P.s. Madanganj, Tehsil Kishangarh, District Ajmer (Raj). ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anupama Dhamaniya for Mr. Devanshu Sharma For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 05/02/2025 1. Instant civil writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, impugning the order dated 31.08.2024 passed in Civil Misc. Application No.38/2023 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No.1, Kishangarh, District Ajmer, dismissing her application dated 23.05.2024 claiming visitation rights to meet her son has been dismissed with cost of Rs.2,500/-. 2. Having heard the counsel for petitioner and from perusal of record, it appears that petitioner has obtained divorce from her husband and as per the terms and conditions of divorce, she had agreed to leave the custody of her minor son with husband. It was one of the condition that after divorce she will not claim visitation rights. [2025:RJ-JP:5075] (2 of 2) [CW-19718/2024] 3. It appears that thereafter, petitioner moved an application dated 06.04.2023, claiming visitation rights to meet her son which was dismissed by the Court vide order dated 29.09.2023. The copy of order dated 29.09.2023 has neither been placed on record nor petitioner challenged that order. 4. Surprisingly, petitioner filed another application dated 23.05.2024 seeking similar relief for claiming visitation rights which has been dismissed by the Court vide order impugned as much as the petitioner has been mulcted with cost of Rs.2,500/-, since the application has been filed malafidely just to harass her ex-husband so also the minor child. 5. Petitioner has miserably failed to establish her bonafides and genuineness to move the second application dated 23.05.2024 and further failed to prove that the fact findings recorded by the trial Court in the impugned order, suffer from any perversity. 6. In that view of the matter, filing of instant writ petition appears to be in sheer misuse of process of law and same deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost. However, since the cost of Rs.2,500/- has already been imposed against petitioner, by the Additional District and Sessions Judge No.1, Kishangarh, District Ajmer and the writ petition is being dismissed in limine at admission stage, this Court is refraining itself to impose any additional cost upon the petitioner. 7. As a result, instant writ petition is hereby dismissed. 8. Any other pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J SOURAV /60