Gujarat High Court
Jayshreeben W/O Manishbhai Sureshbhai ... vs Manishbhai Sureshbhai Chauhan on 26 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2750 of 2025
================================================================
JAYSHREEBEN W/O MANISHBHAI SURESHBHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
MANISHBHAI SURESHBHAI CHAUHAN
================================================================
Appearance:
MR. RAJESH G BAROT(7134) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. RAAJEN D JADHAV(10026) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 26/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 07.02.2025 passed by learned Family Court, Bardoli in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.14 of 2024. The petitioner is seeking following reliefs.
"(a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside impugned judgment and order dated 07.02.2025 passed by Ld. Family, Court Bardloi under Exhibit-12 passed in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.14 of 2024;
(b) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and opration of the impugned judgment and order dated 07.02.2025 passed by Ld. Family court, Bardoli under Exhibit 12 passed in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.14 of 2024;
(c) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass such other and further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice."
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rajesh G. Barot for the Page 1 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025 undefined petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Raajen D. Jadhav for the respondent. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. Raajen D. Jadhav waives service of notice of Rule for respondent.
3. With the consent and request of learned advocates for the parties, this petition is taken up for final hearing.
4. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
4.1. Respondent had filed an application under Sections 7 and 10 of The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for the custody of minor child. It is the case of the respondent husband that the petitioner has deserted the respondent-husband and left the matrimonial house somewhere in April 2021 and since then, both are staying separately. Respondent-husband had filed the application for custody of the minor child. The petitioner-wife has also filed a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and the proceedings are pending. Pending the application Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025 undefined of custody of child, an interim application Exhibit-12 came to be filed by the husband seeking prayers for permitting to meet son on Sundays and during Diwali and Summar vacations and also on birth date. After hearing the parties, learned Family Court partly allowed the application, granting interim custody of minor son on every Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and on all vacations for the aforesaid period.
4.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the present petition is filed by the petitioner.
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner has contended that the child is having health issues and, in the presence of the respondent child, is not comfortable. The order granting temporary custody for the whole day on every Sunday would also hamper the study and other activities of the minor child. It is also contended that during the pendency of the present petition, an interim arrangement was arrived at between the parties, which may be continued. Except above submissions, no Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025 undefined other submissions were made by the learned advocate for the petitioner.
6. Per contra, the advocate for the respondent supported the order and contended that respondent is the biological father of the child and has every right to meet his son. It is contended that since April-2021, the parties are residing separately, and the petitioner is at her matrimonial uncle's home with the minor child, who is aged about 7 years old as on today. The conduct of the petitioner during the proceedings also was that by one reason or other, son does not meet his father. In absence of any perversity in the impugned order, the petition may be dismissed.
Except above, no other submissions were made by the learned advocate for the respondent.
7. I have heard submissions made by the advocates for the parties and also perused the impugned order and other papers. It appears from the impugned order that due to marital discord parties are residing separately since April 2021, and the Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025 undefined proceedings under Section 125 of C.r.P.C. initiated by the petitioner-wife have also been rejected. However, learned Magistrate has ordered maintenance of Rs.750/- per month minor child. The order of rejection of maintenance for the petitioner-wife has been upheld by learned Sessions Court, and the maintenance of the child was enhanced from Rs.750/- per month to Rs.2500/- per month. It has been observed by the learned Family Court that parties have voluntarily agreed for the interim arrangement by agreeing to let father meet his son on 15.12.2024, 29.12.2024, 12.01.2025 and 26.01.2025 between 10.00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. However, petitioner-wife did not comply with the order, which ultimately left the respondent- father in a very disheartening mental condition. Meeting the child during the pendency of the proceedings is the right of the father and parents can't be deprived of their legitimate right to meet and greet child. Unfortunately, the proceedings would drag for number of years, and by that time, the child would also grow up. It might happen that in the future, the child may not Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025 undefined recognize his father. The intention of the petitioner which is coming out on record upon reading the impugned order is that, by hook or by crook, she does not want the child to meet his father. Such conduct of the petitioner is not only deprecated by this Court but also inclines this Court to impose a cost while rejecting the present petition. No litigant is permitted to flout the orders passed by the Courts. A message should be passed on to such litigants by imposing a heavy cost that if any attempt is made by any litigant to either flout the order of the Court or to mislead the Court by making false statements. In the present case, the learned Family Court has observed in paragraph No.18 that the original-opponent has misled the Court about the examination schedule of the minor child to avoid bringing the child to Court to meet the Court for interaction. It appears that petitioner-wife has made all her attempts to see that the child does not meet the Court for interaction. However, upon meeting the child, learned Family Court has found that the child has equal love and affection towards the father. The outcome of the Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/2750/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/09/2025 undefined interaction is sufficient to permit the father to meet his child. No mother can attempt to curtail a legitimate and moral right of father in meeting of child.
8. On considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any reason to interfere with the findings arrived at by learned Family Court. The findings and the conclusions are in consonance with facts and law. There is no arbitrariness or perversity in the order. Resultantly, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order by exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Considering the facts, the petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000. The petitioner shall deposit the cost amount before the learned Family Court, Bardoli within 15 days from receipt of this order. Rule stands discharged. The learned Family Court shall not be influenced by observations made by this Court while deciding main proceedings and shall decide proceedings as per the evidence and law.
(D. M. DESAI,J) RINKU MALI Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Tue Oct 07 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Oct 11 05:09:23 IST 2025