VIKRAM JHA Vs. PREETI KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing the present appeal, the appellant-husband assails order dtd. 14/8/2025 passed by learned Family Court, Faridabad vide which the application moved by wife for the interim custody of their minor son was decided as under:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant-husband contended that respondent-wife left the matrimonial home on 4/4/2024 leaving the minor son under his care and custody. He filed a petition for divorce against the wife on 15/5/2024 and after receipt of summons, the wife filed a petition under Sec. 24 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 on 18/9/2024. The wife did not make any efforts to visit or see the minor child till 18/9/2024. He further contended that wife is living in Delhi and sought custody of the minor son in Faridabad. Since 16/4/2024 onwards, the minor son is residing in a joint family of the husband which consisted of his parents and on the directions of the Family Court, Faridabad, he had to come from Bihar by air to take the child to Faridabad. The wife has filed a case under the Protection of women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at Delhi and she also got lodged one FIR No. 388 against the parents, brother, sister and friend of the husband at Police Station Jaitpur, Delhi. Neither the husband nor the minor son is residing at Faridabad and therefore, the Family Court at Faridabad had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Learned Family Court had wrongly granted the interim custody of minor son to the wife as it amounts to grant of main relief sought by the wife under Sec. 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act. He further contended that it is not for the welfare of the minor son in case he is taken from the custody of the father since child is living with father from the day, the wife left the matrimonial home.

(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the wife contended that she has been granted the interim custody of the child as the child is less than five years. The appeal against the interim inter-locutory order is not maintainable and the child being less than five years, it is for the betterment of the child if he remains under the care and custody of the wife. He further contended that the wife never left the child. The husband sent a mobile message to her father that he is sending his wife through taxi and upon receipt of that message his brother and her brother's friend came and took her to her parents' home. She was tortured and physically beaten by the husband and the child was snatched from her when she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home.