Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shyama Alias Rekha Kunwar vs Khushwant Singh on 14 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:30193
1 CRR-4842-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 4842 of 2025
SHYAMA ALIAS REKHA KUNWAR
Versus
KHUSHWANT SINGH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Arihant Kumar Nahar - learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Satish Jain, learned counsel for the respondents.
ORDER
This Criminal Revision under Section 438 r/w 442 of the BNSS, 2023
r/w Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is preferred challenging the
legality of judgment dated 27/03/2025 in Criminal Appeal No.21/2025 by
the 6th Additional Session Judge, Mandsaur arising out of order dated
28/01/2025 in MJCR/573/2024 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Mandsaur whereby revision petitioner could not succeed in securing interim
custody of her minor daughter.
2. Facts of the case in brief are that the revision petitioner/wife got
married with the respondent No.1 on 30.01.2020 at Mandsaur, M.P. as per
Hindu Rites & Rituals. Out of said wedlock, the petitioner/wife and
respondent No.1/husband had blessed with one baby girl on
13.04.2021 namely Lavanya and an application under Section 12 of the
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:30193
2 CRR-4842-2025
referred as "Act of 2005") was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Mandsaur on 02.07.2024 seeking various reliefs under Section
18 to 22 of the Act of 2005 including various allegations and also filed the
interim application under Section 23 of the Act of 2005 seeking the custody
of her daughter along with Rs.35,000/- as interim maintenance (Rs.25,000/-
for herself and Rs.10,000/- for her minor daughter).
3. The application was replied and contested by the respondents. The
JMFC, Mandsaur awarded an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month as interim
maintenance in favour of the revision petitioner/wife assessing the income of
the respondent no.1/husband as Rs.1,00,000/- and rejected the prayer of
custody of the minor daughter recording the finding that the revision
petitioner have no source of income. She herself have prayed for her
maintenance and minor daughter is being properly taken care by the parents
of the respondent no.1 and in-laws of the revision petitioner and further
rejected the prayer for interim maintenance for minor daughter.
4. The order was challenged before the appellate Court under Section
29 of the Act of 2005 and the appellate Court dismissed the appeal affirming
the order of the trial Court.
5. Challenging the order, this revision petition has been preferred
seeking following relief:-
(i) Instant petition may kindly be allowed by setting aside
the impugned order dated 28.01.2025 and 27.03.2025 to the extent
it denies the relief of custody of child and her maintenance.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:30193
3 CRR-4842-2025
(ii) Application of the petitioner under section 23 read
with section 21 of The Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005 for interim custody of child "Lavanya" and
interim maintenance for herself and child may kindly be allowed.
(iii) Respondents may kindly be directed to give custody
of minor child Lavanya to Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 may
also kindly be directed to Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) towards the
maintenance of minor child.
(iv) Interim maintenance awarded to wife may kindly be
enhanced to Rs.25,000/- along with cost of litigation.
(v) Any other relief, order or direction in the favor of
petitioner as this Court deems fit.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents have opposed the prayer.
Perused the proceedings filed before this Court.
7. At the time of filing the petition before the trial Court on
02.07.2024, the girl child was three years & three months old and presently
also she is only 4 years and 6 months old.
8. It is argued that best interest of the girl child is with the respondents
as the mother of the respondent No.1 is taking care of the child.
9. It is a fact that the revision petitioner/mother is a graduate lady and
presently residing at Ujjain with his brother, who is working as District
Education Officer.
10. The respondent No.1/wife has filed the petition for dissolution of
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:30193
4 CRR-4842-2025
marriage under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family
Court, No.1, Udaypur (Rajasthan) and para 5 of the petition is derived to her
various ailments and raises the arguments of better care of the daughter
below the age of 5 years on the strength of his mother compared to the wife
who is the mother as well as natural guardian of the daughter. The arguments
is not in tune with Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act,
1956 which states that the custody of a minor child, who has not completed
the age of five years shall ordinarily be with the mother.
11. If the father has concern regarding the betterment of child then he
may adopt the recourse to provide the custody of a minor daughter to the
mother/wife seeking visitation right and ensure the proper education of a girl
child by paying the necessary expenses. The trial Court as well as appellate
Court has not considered the rights of the mother regarding the custody of
the girl child below the age of 5 years. Accordingly, the order regarding
custody of the girl child does not pass the test of legality. Hence, the orders
of the trial Court as well as appellate Court to that extent are set aside.
12. The respondents have to handover the custody of girl child -
Lavanya to her mother (revision petitioner) within 15 days from today till the
disposal of the case before the trial Court and the respondents have visitation
rights in the following terms:-
(a) The respondents are allowed to see and interact with the
child virtually twice a week for thirty minutes each. The exact
time of such virtual interactions is to be worked out between the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:30193
5 CRR-4842-2025
parties after giving due consideration to the child's educational
schedule and otherwise. During such virtual sessions, the
petitioner is directed to provide an interference-free environment
to the child and respondents, and ensure that she does not meddle
in such conversations.
(b) The respondents are also permitted to visit the child in-
person for one day every weekend. The respondents shall be
allowed to spend time with the child between 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
every Saturday or Sunday, as may be convenient to both the
parents and the child.
(c) For the purpose of physical visitation, the petitioner is
directed to produce the minor child before the Family Court,
Ujjain on every Saturday at 10 a.m., who is to hand over the
custody to the respondents for seven hours, as mentioned above.
(d) If there is any change in the residence of the petitioner as
intimated today before this Court then she will properly intimate to
the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mandsaur before whom an
application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is pending.
14. The claim for maintenance shall be decided by the Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Mandsaur as per the evidence adduced in the record.
15. The Criminal Revision, accordingly, stands allowed to the extent
indicated above.
C.C. as per rules.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:30193
6 CRR-4842-2025
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
VS
