4-wp6484.2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6484 OF 2023 Vinod Babruwan Hulsure VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through The District Collector And Another ---- Mr.Hemant Surve, Advocate for petitioner Mr.Pravin G. Patil, Advocate for respondent no.1 ---- CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2026 ORDER :- The only issue argued before this court in this matter is regarding the disturbance caused by the respondent between the petitioner’s talks with his minor daughter on telephone/mobile phone. 2. Mr.Surve, learned advocate for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had marital discord with his wife Kavita (now deceased) due to which she had separated from him. She even carried away her minor daughter to her parental house. In the meantime the wife Kavita died and minor daughter is residing with her maternal grand-father i.e. respondent. It is the contention that despite there had been understanding between the parties before the court that the petitioner will have daily telephonic access to his daughter during a specific period the respondents did not allow such 2026:BHC-AUG:42810 2 4-wp6484 telephonic conversation for this or that reason. It is submitted that the petitioner accordingly put his grievance before the Family Court. However the same came to be turned down. Hence, the petitioner/father has filed this petition seeking uninterrupted conversation with his minor daughter. 3. After heaving heard both sides for a considerable time, this court put a query to learned advocate for the respondents as to which time would be convenient during which the petitioner can conveniently talk with his minor daughter on phone. To this, on instructions, learned advocate for the respondent submits that the petitioner can call his daughter during 08.00 p.m. and 09.00 p.m. daily. He submits that the call shall neither be interrupted nor the respondent shall cause any hindrance or obstructions during the said calls. 4. Mr.Surve, learned advocate for the petitioner cited previous instances contending that on the last occasions, the respondent has not adhered to his word and even the order passed by this court for which the petitioner had to produce before the court the transcription of the calls. Be that as it may. 3 4-wp6484 5. Considering the relation between the parties and the issue involved, without going into the merit of the matter, I deem it appropriate to take on record the assurance given by the respondent that he shall make available the petitioner's minor daughter for telephonic conversation with the petitioner daily during 08.00 p.m. and 09.00 p.m. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition stands partly allowed. The respondent shall make available the petitioner's minor daughter for telephonic conversation daily during 08.00 p.m. and 09.00 p.m. 7. Learned advocates appearing for both sides submit that the minor daughter will soon attain the age of 18 years and thereby cease to be a minor. In view of the same, the parties may take appropriate recourse before the Trial Court. 8. The Trial Court is requested to expedite the hearing of Petition No. D-06/2021 [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] ……….. KBP