SWAPNA SATPATHY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforesaid Misc. Cases were heard together as they arise out of the W.P.(Crl.) No. 665 of 2013 disposed of by this Court vide order dated 22.1.2014.

(2.) THE factual backdrop of the case of the husband -Sanjay is that wife -Swapna has married writ -opposite party -Sanjay Kumar Satpathy. Out of their wed -lock, a son was born. The couple left the rented house of the father of husband -Sanjay at plot No. 94, Madhusudan Nagar, Unit -IV, Bhubaneswar and resided separately at Plot No. 154, Soubhagya Nagar, Bhubaneswar in July, 2012. On 23/24.9.2012, it is alleged that wife -Swapna left the husband leaving behind the minor child after quarreling with him.

(3.) IT is a peculiar story which did not stop there. It is further averred that on 26.3.2013 after disposal of MATA No. 11 of 2013, wife -Swapna filed petition under section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar being CP. No. 150 of 2013 seeking judicial separation. In the same proceeding also filed I.A. No. 54 of 2013 on 15.4.2013 seeking custody of the child on the ground that she being the mother, is the best person to protect the interest of the child. It is alleged by the husband -Sanjay that suppressing material facts, wife -Swapna produced order of the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar with the assistance of police, forcibly took away the minor child from the house of the husband -Sanjay. The mother of husband -Sanjay accompanied the child to the Kharavela Nagar P.S. On production of this Court's order in MATA No. 11 of 2013 which was suppressed by wife -Swapna, Police left the child to the custody of husband -Sanjay. In spite of filing the C.P. No. 150 of 2013 before the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar, on 13.5.2013 W.P. (Crl) No. 665 of 2013 was filed by her seeking habeas corpus to produce the child in the custody of wife -Swapna. It is alleged inter alia, by the husband -Sanjay vide M.C. No. 75 of 2014 that the final order in the writ petition was passed without giving proper opportunity to him of being heard about the status and salary of the wife -Swapna who can not protect the best interest of the child. That order was purportedly passed on 22.1.2014 by this Court. So he being the petitioner, has approached this Court to recall the judgment dated 22.1.2014 passed in W.P.(Crl) No. 665 of 2013. On the other hand, the wife -Swapna filed M.C. No. 131 of 2014 praying to implement the order dated 22.1.2014 passed in W.P.(Crl) No. 665 of 2013. The husband -Sanjay contested the Misc. Case No. 131 of 2014 on the ground that such order being not passed on contest, should not be implemented and requires fresh adjudication.