CR No.2193 of 2025 (O&M) S. No.130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CR No.2193 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:07.04.2025 Ranjeet Kaur .....Pe00oner Vs. Jasjeet Singh .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present:- Mr. J.S. Dadwal, Advocate for the peoner. **** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral) Peoner is mother of minor child aged 03 years and 06 months. Said child is presently in the custody of her father, i.e. husband of the peoner. Peoner filed a peon (Annexure P.1) under Secons 7, 25 and 26 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 read with Secons 6 & 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 seeking custody of person of minor daughter, namely, Harjas Kaur (date of birth 15.09.2021). In that peon, she moved applicaon (Annexure P.2) seeking interim custody of the minor child. However, the said applicaon for interim custody has been rejected by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jalandhar vide impugned order dated 01.03.2025 (Annexure P.4), which has been assailed before this Court. 2. It is contended by learned counsel that the minor child is less than 06 years old and, therefore, peoner being the mother is entled for her interim custody, parcularly when the child is a girl child, in view of Secon 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. 3. The afore-said contenon was also raised by the peoner before the Family Court and a<er nocing the relevant case law, as per which it is Page No.1 out of 4 pages RENU 2025.04.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.2193 of 2025 (O&M) welfare of the child, which was required to be taken into consideraon, the Family Court observed as under:- “8. Being guided through such statutory provisions of law laid down in the above referred judgments, the material on file of this maAer is carefully considered and scrunized. It is an undisputed fact that the minor Harjas Kaur was born on 15.09.2021 and as of now she is aged about 3 years and 4 months. It is also not a disputed fact that the appellant le< her matrimonial house on 21.04.2023 and she has instuted this peon and applicaon for interim custody on 04.08.2023 i.e. a<er a period of about four months of her separaon from the minor. In a case of custody of minor, it is the primary duty of the court to see that under whose custody the welfare of the child lies in a beAer way. In this case, the respondent has specifically stated that while leaving the matrimonial house, the applicant by herself le< the minor daughter with him. This contenon of the respondent is prima facie corroborated with the video recording pertaining to the said moment. It is seen in the video that the applicant did not even respond to the request of respondent to take her minor daughter alongwith her when she le< the matrimonial house. In another video, the applicant is seen bunging her head connuously against the wall by saying `my son my parents’. Interesngly said videos were brought to the noce of the court during hearing that too in the presence of the applicant, but she has simply stated that at that point of me she was under mental stress due to matrimonial discord as such she did so. Even in para No.9 of her peon (the contents of which are part of this applicaon), she has specifically stated that the movement of her leaving the matrimonial house without the minor but this contenon of the applicant is yet to be tested on merits during trial. 9. As of now, for the limited purpose of disposal of this applicaon, the material on file clearly shows that the minor child was le< by the applicant at her in laws house with her own sweet will and she never tried to take back the custody of minor child despite the expiry of next four months from her separaon from the minor. It is also necessary to observe here that as per the copy of receipt placed on record by the respondent, the minor has already been admiAed in Nursery class at St. Joseph Convent School, Kartarpur as such, the transfer of custody of Page No.2 out of 4 pages RENU 2025.04.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.2193 of 2025 (O&M) minor to the applicant would amount to re-roong the minor in new atmosphere a<er a period of about 2 years of her exclusive stay with her father/ respondent and grand parents as well as her acquaintances in the school. In view of the law laid down by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Sunita Vs. Sa0sh Kumar (supra), while deciding the queson of custody of minor below five years, provisions of Secon 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act does not spulate that under all circumstances the child below five years must remain in the custody of mother. As such, keeping in view the circumstances involved in this maAer, this court does not deem it appropriate to shi< the minor child to the custody of applicant. This inference is also valid in view of the fact that the applicant has not even pleaded that the respondent is not taking proper care of the minor daughter, rather she has opted to put fourth the plea of beAer financial status of her parents only which fact has no relevance in the absence of her plea that the respondent does not have resources to keep and maintain the minor child in proper manner. 10. This Court is also mindful of the fact that for the proper upbringing of the minor child, she needs the company of both her mother and father as such, the observaon made in the preceding paragraphs, shall be without prejudice to the right of applicant to meet the minor child on the first and third Saturday of every month at ADR Center, Jalandhar and the respondent shall be under the responsibility to bring the minor child at ADR Center, Jalandhar from 2:30 PM to 4:30 PM on the designated days. It is also made clear that the right of applicant/ mother to seek interim custody shall remain intact in future on change of circumstances.” 4. Having considered the reasons menoned in para Nos.8 and 9 of the impugned order passed by the trial Court, this Court does not find any merit in the present peon, considering the fact that it is the peoner, who at her own had le< the child with her husband, at the me of leaving the matrimonial home and when the husband of the peoner asked her to take the child, she did not even respond. It has also been noced by the Family Court that child is presently admiAed in Nursery Class at St. Joseph Convent School, Kartarpur, and, therefore, Page No.3 out of 4 pages RENU 2025.04.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CR No.2193 of 2025 (O&M) it will not be in her interest to re-root her in new atmosphere a<er a period of about two years of her exclusive stay with her father and grandparents. 5. In the absence of any illegality or perversity in the impugned order, this Court is not inclined to interfere therein. 6. No merits. 7. Dismissed. April 07, 2025 (DEEPAK GUPTA) renu JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Page No.4 out of 4 pages RENU 2025.04.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh