20-WP-875-2021.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.875 OF 2021 Ajinkya Dilip Doundkar …Petitioner Versus Rohini Ajinkya Doundkar & Ors. …Respondents Mr. P.M. Arjunwadkar, for the Petitioner. Mr. Dilip Bodke a/w Ms. Shraddha Pawar, for the Respondent. Smt. Pallavi N. Dabholkar, APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM: MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. DATED: 28th NOVEMBER 2025. PC:- 1. The present Criminal Writ Petition has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 07.12.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, Pune, in Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2020, which confirmed the order dated 03.11.2020 passed by the learned JMFC, Indapur, below Exhibit 8 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 461 of 2019. 2. The Respondent No.1 in the present Writ Petition is the wife of the Petitioner. She has filed a DV complaint before the JMFC, Indapur, in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.461 of 2019, during the pendency of which an Interim Application was filed for the custody of the 3 year old child. The Application for custody was decided by the JMFC, Indapur, vide order dated 03.11.2020. While passing the order, it was observed by the JMFC, Indapur, 28th November 2025 Kartikeya, P.A. 20-WP-875-2021.DOC that upon perusal of the documents and considering the submissions, the parties had filed divorce proceedings and both were working in the Police Department. Hence, considering that the age of the child was only 3 years and 3 months, it was appropriate that, at such a tender age, the custody of the child needs to be handed over to the mother. It is further observed that since it was an Interim Application, it was not going to affect the merits of the matter. Taking into account that the interest of the child is of paramount consideration while dealing with custody matters of children of tender age, the custody was handed over to the Applicant-Wife. The order passed by the JMFC, Indapur, was the subject matter of challenge in an Appeal under Section 29 of the DV Act, 2005, before the learned Sessions Court, Baramati, District Pune. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, while affirming the view taken by the JMFC, held that Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act is relevant for the custody of minor children. It provides that the custody of minor children who have not completed the age of 5 years is ordinarily with the mother, since the affection and love can only be showered by the mother at such a tender age. With the above observations, the Appeal was dismissed. The present Writ Petition arises out of both orders passed by both the Courts below. 3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that, though the child was 3 years and 3 months old when the first order was passed, with the passage of time, the child has grown up and is now more than 5 years of age. Therefore, the child also needs the love and affection of a father. The other issue of concern raised by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner is that the maternal uncle of the child, that is, the brother of Respondent No.1, has criminal 28th November 2025 Kartikeya, P.A. 20-WP-875-2021.DOC antecedents. Therefore, it is likely to affect the child. On this premise, he is seeking to challenge the orders passed by both the Courts. 4. The learned Advocate for the Respondent-Wife has drawn my attention to the reply affidavit. According to him, the Courts have rightly taken into consideration the tender age of the child and the law governing the field, they have rightly passed the order. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the present proceedings, from time to time, access has been granted to the father by this Court vide orders dated 13.07.2021, 26.07.2021, 02.08.2021, and 24.08.2021. He also submits that, pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the Consent Terms have been executed between the parties for access to the child, and accordingly, the Petitioner-Husband had handed over the custody of the minor daughter on 07.01.2021. The Respondent-Wife has agreed to give access to the minor daughter on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Wednesdays of every month at Indapur Court between 12:00 p.m. and 01:00 p.m. The Respondent has further agreed to give overnight access to the minor daughter once a month, on the 4th Wednesday at 10:30 a.m. before the Marriage Counsellor at the Family Court, and the father is required to hand over the custody of the daughter to the Respondent on Thursday morning at 10:30 a.m. before the same Marriage Counsellor at the Family Court. Accordingly, the arrangement is still in existence. As such, according to him, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the present Writ Petition. 5. After hearing the parties and going through both the orders, this Court is of the view that the learned Magistrate has taken a pragmatic approach in the matter and has passed an appropriate 28th November 2025 Kartikeya, P.A. 20-WP-875-2021.DOC order, taking into consideration the tender age of the child and granting custody of the child to the mother. The view taken by the JMFC has been rightly affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Baramati. This being an Interim Application, the custody was handed over to the mother. It is not disputed by any of the parties that the child still needs the care and protection of the mother. The father has been granted limited access from time to time pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, and an arrangement has been arrived at by way of Consent Terms, which is still in existence. Therefore, I do not find any case made out for interference in the orders passed by both Courts below. It also needs to be appreciated that the substantive proceedings for custody of the child are presently going on between the parties before the CJJD, Khed. 6. This being an interim arrangement and the Consent Terms are still in existence, hence, I do not find any case for interference. It is expected that the parties will abide by the Consent Terms during the pendency of the DV proceedings. The proceedings pending before the CJJD, Khed, for custody of the child being independent proceedings, shall not be affected by any observations made by this Court in the present proceedings. 7. With the above observations, the Writ Petitions stands disposed of. (MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) { 28th November 2025 Kartikeya, P.A.