- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54616 WP No. 38048 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 38048 OF 2025 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: SIDDHARTH CHHOTTRAY S/O SOUMYAKANTA CHTTOTTRAY, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, TOWER 6, FLAT NO.61002, NIKOO HOMES 1, THANISANDRA, BENGALURU- 560 064 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ABHILASH RAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: AKANKSHA MOHANTY W/O SIDDHARTH CHHOTTRAY, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54616 WP No. 38048 of 2025 G1, MANIPAL VISTAS APARTMENTS, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU- 560 051 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ARUN GOVINDARAJ, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.12.2025 (ANNEXURE- A) PASSED IN G AND WC NO. 50/2025 BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU AND DISMISS I.A. NO.6 (ANNEXURE- D) WITH COSTS, AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54616 WP No. 38048 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.6 dated 12.12.2025 in G and WC.No.50/2025 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, the petitioner-father is before this Court. 2. The Family Court has allowed I.A.No.6 and permitted the respondent to apply for and complete all formalities relating to issuance of U.S tourist visa for the minor child unilaterally and without the consent and signature of the father. However to balance the interest of the father, apart from the fact that there is already an order restraining the mother from taking the child abroad, to ensure compliance with the same order, I.A.No.7 was also allowed and as soon as the respondent receives the passport of the child, the mother was directed to deposit the passport before the Family Court. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that when there is an order directing the mother not to leave the country without the permission of the Court, the mother could not have made an application for the U.S visa whether it - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54616 WP No. 38048 of 2025 is a tourist visa or otherwise. It is submitted that if once the visa is granted for 10 years and if she leaves the country, the father will not be in a position to get them back.. It is submitted that the Family Court ought not to have permitted the mother to apply for the visa unilaterally. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-mother submits that the mother has no intention to travel. She is having the U.S visa and she had applied for the son also. It is submitted that already part of the formalities were completed. It is also undertaken that immediately after all the formalities, the passport will be deposited before the Family Court. The apprehensions that are raised by the petitioner are without any basis. It is submitted that balancing the interests of both the parties, the Family Court had passed a reasoned order and there are no grounds to interfere with the order impugned. 5. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. There is an order restraining the mother from taking the child out of the country without the permission of the Court and after that order was passed, there was no necessity for the mother to make an application for this - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:54616 WP No. 38048 of 2025 visa. However, the Family Court balancing the interest of the father had passed an order directing the mother to deposit the passport immediately. In those circumstances, this Court do not find any reason to interfere with the order of passed by the Family Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. All IA’s in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE RJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17