Teena vs Rahul Mewada
2023 Latest Caselaw 4353 MP

                                                            1
                                IN      THE   HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                     BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                               ON THE 20 th OF MARCH, 2023
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 43377 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           TEENA W/O RAHUL MEWADA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
                           OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE RANIBADOD, TEHSIL
                           POLAYKALAN    DISTRICT  SHAJAPUR    (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI VISMIT PANOT - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           1.    RAHUL MEWADA S/O BAHADUR SINGH MEWADA,
                                 AGED    ABOUT     35  YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                 AGRICULTURIST MEWADA COLONY, TEHSIL
                                 AASHTA DISTRICT SEHORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.    BAHADUR   SINGH   S/O   LT.  RAMCHARAN
                                 MEWADA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                 AGRICULTURIST MEWADA COLONY,       TEH.
                                 AASHTA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           3.    BASANTA BAI W/O BAHADUR SINGH MEWADA,
                                 AGED   ABOUT     60  YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                 HOUSEWIFE MEWADA COLONY, TEH. AASHTA
                                 (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           (BY SHRI ABHIJEET SINGH CHOUHAN - ADVOCATE)

                                 This application coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                             ORDER

This is a petition u/S.482 of Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order dated 23rd August, 2022 passed by II ASJ, Shujalpur, District Shajapur wherein in

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 21/03/2023 11:06:30 AM

Cr.R. No.20/2022 whereby the order passed by SDM, Shujalpur dated 31.5.2022 has been set aside.

The applicant filed an application u/S.97 of Cr.P.C. for custody of the child before the SDM, Shujalpur and by order dated 31.5.2022, he directed the custody of the child to the present applicant. Being aggrieved by the said order the respondents filed revision before the court below challenging the said order. The said revision has been allowed and the order of the Magistrate has been set aside and the custody of the child has been directed to be handed over to the non applicants within one month. Upon perusal of Sec.97 of Cr.P.C, it is evident that custody of child between the natural parents cannot be

adjudicated. The appropriate remedy is under Guardian and Wards Act. Counsel for applicant submits that the applicant has already availed the said remedy before appropriate forum and has filed an application for interim custody of the child. Counsel for respondents submits that the order passed by the SDM is without jurisdiction. In support of his submissions he has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Vs. Laxmi Bai (1998) 9 SCC 266 wherein it has been held that the custody of a child cannot be directed to be handed over u./S.97 of Cr.P.C when the child is living with his own father.

After hearing learned counsel for parties and taking into consideration the provisions of Sec.97 and the judgment passed in the case of Ramesh (supra), I do not find any illegality in the order impugned passed by the revisional court setting aside the order of SDM directing for custody of the child in favour of the applicant.

The petition u/S.482 of Cr.P.C is dismissed.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 21/03/2023 11:06:30 AM

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE VM

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SOURABH YADAV Signing time: 21/03/2023 11:06:30 AM