Vafa Abdul Majid Kathiwala vs Yusuf Khatri
2023 Latest Caselaw 10049 Bom

                                                              19-cri.revn-310-2023.doc
Sonali


                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                      CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.310 OF 2023

         Vafa Abdul Majid Kathiwala
         formerly Vafa Yusuf Khatri & Anr.                        ...Applicants
              Versus
         Yusuf Khatri & Anr.                                      ...Respondents


         Mr. Jagdish Choudhary a/w. Mr. Ishwar Nankani and Ms. Rhea Sinkar &
         Ms. Prajakta Sawardekar i/b. M/s. Nankani & Associates, for the
         Applicants.

         Mr. Rumi Mirza a/w. Mr. Kaushal Thakker i/b. Dipesh Mehta & Associates,
         for the Respondent No.1.

         Mrs. M. R. Tidke, APP, for the State/Respondent No.2

                                      CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED : 29th SEPTEMBER 2023 P.C. :

1. The Applicant No.1 is the mother and the Applicant No.2 is her

minor son who is around 17 years old. The present Criminal Revision

Application is filed challenging the legality and validity of the order

dated 3rd August 2023 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate,

40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai below Exhibit-15 in C.C.

No.27/DV/2021 as well as the Judgment and Order dated 16 th

September 2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

19-cri.revn-310-2023.doc Sonali

Greater Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.606 of 2023. By the said

order dated 16th September 2023, the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Greater Bombay dismissed the Appeal. Thus in effect, order

dated 3rd August 2023 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate,

40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai below Exhibit-15 in C.C.

No.27/DV/2021 is upheld. The said Exhibit-15 application in C.C.

No.27/DV/2021 has been filed by Respondent No.1-father, seeking

access to his son-Applicant No.2. By said order, the Respondent No.1

is permitted to meet his son on every 1 st and 3rd Sunday between

11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. from September-2023.

2. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 states that a

Protection Officer has been appointed to implement the said order.

3. The position on record show that the Applicants and the

Respondent No.1 i.e. parents and their minor son were living

together till 1st October 2021. It is a settled legal position that in

matters of custody and access, welfare of the child shall be of

paramount consideration. The child requires love and affection of

both the parents.

4. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the

Applicants that the son is refusing to meet his father. However, it is

19-cri.revn-310-2023.doc Sonali

necessary to have a healthy relationship between the parents and

child for the holistic development of the child. For this purpose, it is

absolutely necessary that the father-Respondent No.1 should be given

access to his son-Applicant No.2.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the Applicants has raised certain

legal aspects. Therefore, a detailed hearing is required. However, no

case is made out for grant of any interim relief sought in this

application.

6. Stand over to 13th October 2023 at 2.30 p.m.

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

Signed by: Sonali Patil Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 30/09/2023 16:05:57