HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CM(M) No. 157/2026 CM No. 5078/2026 Preeti Bhagat …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sachin Dogra, Advocate vs Rajesh Kumar .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. S. S. Ahmed, Advocate with Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 31.07.2026 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing order dated 03.07.2026 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jammu (For short ‘the trial court’) in the proceedings arising out of the petition under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act filed by the petitioner only. 2. Pursuant to order dated 03.07.2026 in the application filed by the petitioner only, the learned trial court had directed the respondent to handover temporary/interim custody of minor girl child to the petitioner on 04.07.2026 and further the petitioner was directed to handover the custody of minor back to the respondent on 19.07.2026. 3. Notice to the respondent. 4. Mr. S. S. Ahmed, Advocate waives notice. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly conceded that the petitioner has not handed over the custody of the child to the respondent in terms of the order impugned in this petition. Learned Serial No. 192 2 CM(M) No. 157/2026 counsel for the petitioner further submits that the learned trial be directed to decide the application for grant of interim custody filed by the petitioner within some stipulated time frame. 6. Mr. S. S. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the minor child is a student of G. D. Goenka Public School and her examinations are going to commence on 04.08.2026. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 8. This Court cannot make this case as an exceptional case for the trial court to consider the same on priority basis as there are other cases as well before the learned trial court. More so the petitioner has not complied the order dated 03.07.2026 and in fact has no locus to assail the same as it was at the instance of petitioner only that the custody of the minor child was handed over to the petitioner. 9. In view of the above, no case for indulgence is made out. The present petition is found to be misconceived, as such, the same is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to handover the custody of the minor girl child back to the respondent. (RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE Jammu 31.07.2026 Neha-II NEHA KUMARI 2026.07.31 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document