LAWS(TRIP)-2015-10-16

SREEPARNA BANIK (SAHA) Vs. ANKUR SAHA AND ORS.

Decided On October 13, 2015
Sreeparna Banik (Saha) Appellant
V/S
Ankur Saha And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17th March, 2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the 'mother') was married to the respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'father') on 27.02.2009. Differences arose between husband and wife. In this case, this Court is only dealing with the issue as to who should be granted the custody of the child and therefore, I am not going into the allegations made by the husband and wife against each other. There is no dispute that in the month of August, 2013, the mother left the matrimonial home along with her child. It is disputed whether the mother left over own accord or whether she was forced and compelled to leave the matrimonial home. This matter is not being decided here. A few days later, the mother of the respondent i.e. grandmother of the child took the child back to the father's home. Thereafter, a notice was issued on behalf of the wife to the husband on 19.08.2014 leveling charges and seeking custody of the child.

(3.) THE main reason which weighed with the learned Magistrate while passing the order was that a child of such tender age needs the love, care and affection of her parents especially the mother. The learned Magistrate found that the female child is only 4 years old and, therefore, requires the care and nourishment of the mother. Even from the facts which were alleged in the complaint it was apparent that the child had been living with the father for more than one year and four months prior to the date of the order being passed. On 16.8.2014 a notice had been sent by the wife -petitioner to the husband in which the wife had complained that the child had been taken away from her on 15.8.2013. Thereafter in response to this notice the husband sent a reply in which it was mentioned that for 33 days the child had remained with the mother on various dates.