- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA REVIEW PETITION NO. 381 OF 2026 BETWEEN: MRS. ANGELINA SANDEEP GUPTA D/O MR. VALERII, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO. A-502, SERENE BRIDGE, CORNERSTONE UTOPIA, SH-35, VARTHUR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 087. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BIPIN HEGDE, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. KARTHIK V. ADVOCATE) AND: MR. SANDEEP GUPTA, S/O MR. SATHISH, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT B-75, BEARYS ANUGRAHA, NO.18, PATEL H. RAMAIAH ROAD, ADJACENT TO K.S.F.C LAYOUT, LINGARAJAPURAM, BENGALURU-560084. …RESPONDENT (BY MR. KIRAN SEBASTIAN ROZARIO, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER PASSED IN WP NO.16913 OF 2026 (GM-FC) DATED 6TH JULY 2026 PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT AND TO KINDLY CALL FOR RECORDS IN WP NO.16913 OF 2026 (GM-FC). THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 23.07.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA CAV ORDER This review petition is filed in WP No.16913/2026. This review petition is filed by the wife against the order of this Court in WP No.16913/2026 dated 06.07.2026. She stated that their marriage was registered at Bandra, Mumbai on 30.06.2016 and thereafter, was performed as per Hindu rites on 14.02.2017 at Ashwem Beach, Goa. They are blessed with a son namely Aryan Gupta on 06.01.2018. They are residing separately from 2023. Both of them entered into memorandum of settlement on 12.07.2024 in MC No.3993/2024 filed for judicial separation which was decreed on 07.08.2024 as per terms of memorandum of settlement. Petitioner also filed G&WC - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 217/2025 for declaring that she is a sole guardian of minor child. Respondent/husband filed I.A.No.7 seeking injunction restraining the mother from taking the child outside Court premises but it was rejected on 19.12.2025. I.A.No.6 was filed on 17.03.2026 on the ground that there are no exceptional circumstances warranting interference with the child's existing custody. Aggrieved by the said order, respondent filed W.P.No.16913/2026. On that day, there was no representation by the learned counsel for wife. She also filed written arguments. It was reserved on 03.07.2026 she filed written arguments on 04.07.2026 but Writ Petition was allowed on 06.07.2026 by granting interim custody of the child to the respondent/father by disturbing long standing custody of the child with mother. As such, this review petition is filed. 2. It is stated that child is aged 8 years 6 months. Wife filed MC No.3551/2023 for divorce and Crl.Misc.27/2024 for domestic violence, Cr.No.0698/2023 under 498A, Cr.No.0047/2024 under Section 354D of IPC. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 Respondent filed for judicial separation in MC No.3993/2024. They entered into a memorandum of settlement on 12.07.2024. As per the terms of memorandum of settlement, MC No.3993/2024 was disposed of on 07.08.2024. Review petitioner/mother contended that respondent/father failed to comply the terms and conditions of the memorandum of settlement. As such, she filed a case under Guardian & Wards Act. In a statement given by the child to Child Welfare Committee and to the investigating officer on 01.07.2026, he stated that he was afraid of his father as he witnessed physical abuse. It is mainly contended that no opportunity of hearing was given to her in the writ petition and it is an error apparent on the face of the record and the wishes and safety concern of the child are not considered though they were recorded by the Family Court Judge and Child Welfare Committee and it is further stated that she is a teetotaler for more than a year whereas respondent defamed her as an alcohol abuser. She filed other - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 documents which was not considered and police summoned respondent for several times but the said factor was not considered and there was a breach of memorandum of settlement and more over, respondent withheld the child identity documents and approaching FRRO seeking cancellation of her OCI Card and he also misrepresented to FRRO, Lucknow that they were divorced though divorce application is still pending. It is further stated that petitioner was residing in India from past 15 years. Once in last 6 years, she travelled abroad to attend her grand mother funeral for 24 hours. She is an infant therapist at Lune Baby Care Pvt Ltd and she is having well established business namely Maia organics and she is doing business activities for more than two years. As such, she cannot leave the country. Moreover, the distance between her house and school is 900 meters whereas distance between respondent/father's house and school is 35 kms and school will commence by 7.45 a.m. Child is - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 not willing to go with the father as per his own statement. Therefore, requested for review of the order. 3. Heard arguments of both the sides. 4. Review petitioner/wife is a Ukranian whereas respondent is an Indian. After the birth of the child, there were differences between both of them. As such, husband filed MC No.3993/2024 for judicial separation, wife filed MC No.3551/2023 for divorce. During the pendency of the same, both of them entered into memorandum of settlement in which they have mentioned in detail regarding the visitation rights of the child. Wife contended that respondent is addicted to drugs and alcohol and he is not taking care of the child properly. As such, she filed for divorce and also for custody of the child. 5. A perusal of the memorandum of settlement deed dated 12.07.2024 shows that both the parents should have joint custody that mother should have custody of the child from Monday to Friday and father - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 should take custody from Friday afternoon till Monday morning, but the father of the child mainly contended in the writ petition that she was not allowing him to spend time with child according to the settlement during week ends and she was taking away the child. As such, he could not meet the child since long time. Mother of the child mainly alleged that he is addicted to drugs and alcohol, as such, child is also not at all interested to go to him. But this settlement was entered between both parties on 12.07.2024 voluntarily and willfully, in pursuance of the said agreement, petitioner agreed to withdraw G&WC No.217/2025 and WP No.7021/2024 filed for stay of renewal of the passport and respondent agreed to withdraw MC No.3531/2023, Crl.Misc.No.27/2024, Cr.No.0698/2023 and Cr.No.0047/2024 as both the parties consciously entered into terms and conditions of the settlement and in pursuance of the said settlement, judicial separation was granted and they also agreed to withdraw all the cases but later both of them failed to - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 comply the conditions. As such, wife continued her divorce proceedings and also G&WC proceedings and also not handed over the child to the father. Father of the child filed 3 copies of passports and expressed his apprehension that she may leave the country with the child and he also filed the school attendance register to show the attendance of the child as 77% and he also filed photographs of petitioner/mother to show that she was busy with weekend parties and was also taking the child along with her. As such, there is no conducive environment with the mother for upbringing of the child. Though petitioner had also alleged that respondent is addicted to drugs and alcohol and not taking care of the child and thus, child is not ready to join him. She has not filed any documents to substantiate her version regarding addiction of drugs or alcohol. She stated that she is residing in India from past 15 years and she has established business, as such, she will not leave the jurisdiction of the Country, but she has not explained why - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 she got 3 passports in 3 different names. Even in the review petition, she has not stated anything regarding photographs filed to show her life style but simply stated that recently she stopped alcoholism and continuing healthy life. No doubt, it is for the Court to look into best interest of the child while granting interim custody but at this stage, both of them made allegations against each other as review petitioner/wife has not followed the terms and conditions of settlement. He filed I.A.No.6 before the family Court. But the family court simply directed both parties to comply the terms and conditions mentioned in the memorandum of settlement. As such, he preferred this writ petition. 6. It is not the case of the review petitioner that no opportunity was given to her on 03.07.2026 when the arguments of writ petitioner was heard, there was no representation when there was request for filing of arguments and it was permitted. Accordingly, she filed the same on 04.07.2026 and after considering the arguments - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 of both the sides, writ petition was allowed and interim custody of the child was shifted from review petitioner to father during pendency of G&W case. Therefore, it is for both parties to raise their contentions in G&W case which is still pending and it is for the Court to decide the permanent custody of the child by duly considering the entire evidence on record. 7. Review petitioner further stated that the child is not at all interested to go to the father and expressed his intention before the Family Court before Child Welfare Committee and also Investigating Officer and it was not considered. It is quite but common in Family Court matters that the child will be influenced with the mind set of the parents with whom the child was residing. In this case, child is residing with mother and naturally he is reluctant to go to the father, but the photographs filed before the Court shows that boy was comfortable with the father. Therefore, this Court finds that there are no merits - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010480042026 NC: 2026:KHC:40212 RP No. 381 of 2026 in the review petition. Accordingly, review petition is dismissed. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE DS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69