Bombay High Court
Sudha Suraj Gupta vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 14 May, 2026
Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.05.14
15:57:35
+0530 38-wp-2423-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2423 of 2026
Mrs Sudha Suraj Gupta ...Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
__________
Mr RR Mishra the Petitioner.
Ms Kranti Hiwrale, APP for the State.
Ms Arti Agicha for Respondents No.3, 4 and 5.
__________
CORAM : ADVAIT M. SETHNA &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 14 MAY 2026 (VACATION COURT) P.C.:
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Considering the urgency in the proceedings, the matter has been taken today before the Vacation Court. The corpus i.e. the child is before the Court today. He is three and a half years old child. The parties i.e. the parents of the child are also before the Court. It appears that there are matrimonial proceedings pending between the parties. There is also a custody proceeding which is also pending before the Family Court, Mumbai.
Chitra Sonawane. Page 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:58:43 :::
38-wp-2423-2026.doc
3. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, it appears that the Petitioner i.e. the mother of the child is a working woman. The averments in the petition itself reveal that during the day until the petitioner comes back from the job, the child is under Day-care. At present the custody of the child is with the father.
4. Considering the tender age of the child and keeping in mind best interest of the minor child, which is paramount, the interest of justice would be served, in our view, by passing the following Interim Order.
(i) In the interragum, we direct that the custody of the child in the morning hours between 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. shall remain with the father.
(ii) As the parties reside in the same locality, the custody of the child shall be with the mother from 9:00 p.m. to 9.00 a.m. on the next day.
(iii) It would be the responsibility of the father to drop the child where the mother is residing. Equally, it would be the responsibility of the mother to safely drop the child where the father is residing, between these timings as indicated.
(iv) Needless to mention that the child is not to be left alone either by the Petitioner (Mother) or the Respondent (Father).
5. We hope and expect that the parents would cooperate at least as far as welfare of the child is concerned and will duly comply with the above Chitra Sonawane. Page 2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:58:43 ::: 38-wp-2423-2026.doc directions.
6. List the proceedings on 10.06.2026 before the regular Court for further consideration.
7. Needless to mention that we have not expressed any opinion on merits, more particularly, on the pending matrimonial disputes and/or the custody petition which is subjudice before the the Family Court, Mumbai.
8. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order. [SANDESH D. PATIL, J] [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] Chitra Sonawane. Page 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:58:43 :::