(1.) This is an appeal under Section 47 of The Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinafter referred to as =the Act') wherein challenge has been made to the order dated December 7, 2011 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Courts, Dwarka, New Delhi whereby the petition of the appellant under Section 25 read with 10 and 12 of the aforesaid Act for the grant of custody of minor daughter, namely, Saesha Singh and for appointment of appellant as a guardian of the said child, has been dismissed.
(2.) The marriage between the parties was solemnised on November 25, 2007 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. A daughter Saesha Singh was born from their wedlock at Base Hospital, Delhi on October 29, 2008. When the petition seeking custody and appointment of guardianship of the minor Saesha Singh was filed, the child was 18 months of age. Presently she is about 4 years and 5 months of age. Appellant is a teacher in Kendriya Vidyalaya-3, INA Colony, New Delhi. Respondent is an Army Officer.
(3.) The respondent due to his duties used to come from office late. After returning from office respondent invariably used to drink and thereafter used to beat the appellant and was also using filthy language. She had alleged that on December 29, 2009 respondent gave her beating and had thrown her out of the house. She had alleged that with the intervention of neighbour she was permitted to enter the house. Again on February 03, 2010 respondent had beaten her and had taken out an army dagger. The appellant saved herself and her child with great difficulty. In the scuffle respondent injured his hand and was treated in military hospital. Again on August 04, 2010 respondent in a drunken state gave beatings to her and threw her out of the house along with the child. The appellant had called police. The police personnel called the military police and a complaint was lodged. Appellant had also called her parents who had come to her house from Noida. Her parents took hold of the child and the appellant and when they were about to leave, the respondent pulled out the child from the hands of her mother and went inside the house and locked himself. He was drunk at that time. The police suggested not to do anything otherwise respondent would harm the child. It was assured that the child would be returned to her in the morning. Accordingly, the appellant and the respondent were instructed to come to the police along with the child in the morning. The respondent did not bring the child and threatened that he would not give the child to her. Since then, she had been running from pillar to post to get back the child but respondent had been refusing.