SHWETA Vs. ANAND SEKHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dtd. 10/11/2021whereby the Family Court declined to grant interim custody to the petitioner-mother of the twin daughter and only granted her visitation rights.

(2.) The brief facts relevant to the present lis are that the marriage of the petitioner and the respondent No.1 was solemnized on 16/11/2011. On 24/6/2020 twin children (a boy and a girl) were born to the couple. The baby girl was 1.9 kgs at the time of her birth. The baby girl was later detected as suffering from Hemihypertrophy. It is the case set-up by the petitioner that on 14/8/2021 she was thrown out of the matrimonial home and that she was not allowed to take the minor baby girl with her. The petitioner filed a petition under Ss. 7 and 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 read with Sec. 6(A) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 for permanent custody of the minor twins along with an application under Sec. 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 seeking urgent interim custody of the minor baby girl. The respondent No.1 contested the said petition as well as the application for interim custody. Vide the impugned order dtd. 10/11/2021 the application for interim custody was disposed off with the following directions:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the minor baby girl is one of the twins and is aged about 02 years and that as per Sec. 6(A) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 the custody of a minor, who has not completed the age of 05 years, shall ordinarily be with the mother. Learned counsel in support of his argument has relied upon the judgment by the Division Bench of this Court in the cases of Mukul Chauhan Vs. Neha Aggarwal &Ors. [2019(4) RCR (Civil) 342]; Pinki Agarwal Vs. State of Punjab &Ors. [2022(1) RCR (Civil) 594] and Pallavi Vs. Nand Kishor alias Naveen [2018(4) RCR (Civil) 136].