PARSHANT CHANANA Vs. SEEMA ALIAS PRIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has been directed vide order dated 28.01.2009, by the Guardian Judge, Chandigarh, to produce the minor daughter Nitika on every second Saturday for two hours i.e., from 2:00 PM to 4:00 PM, in the Court room in order to enable the respondent to meet the child during pendency of her petition under Section 17, 25 & 26, of the Guardians and Wards Act, read with Section 6 & 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, regarding custody of the minor child.

(2.) FEELING aggrieved by the said order of interim visitation rights granted to the respondent mother of the child, this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner. The petitioner had made an attempt to get the order dated 20.01.2009 reviewed by moving an application but vide order dated 31.03.2009, the same has been dismissed. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the said order also. The respondent mother of minor daughter Nitika has claimed a declaration from the Guardian Judge, Chandigarh, that she is natural guardian of the minor girl Nitika and has prayed for restoration of the minor child, who is under the control and custody of the petitioner by moving a petition under Section 17, 25 & 26 of the Guardians and Wards Act, read with Section 6 & 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, claiming that the parties resided together as husband and wife at Chandigarh, in House No.1433, Sector 34-C, Chandigarh. Out of their wedlock, a female child Nitika was born on 25.11.2000, at Karnal as the respondent had been sent to her parents' house three months prior to the date of delivery. Thereafter, the respondent along with petitioner shifted to Mohali, where the petitioner allegedly developed illicit relations with teacher of the child Ms Bharti, a divorced lady. The petitioner illegally snatched the daughter Nitika from the petitioner without her consent and sent the minor daughter to her sister Radha Malik living at Lucknow, she being issueless. Respondent claims that she had been deprived to impart motherly love and affection towards the minor child. The relations became sore thereafter. The respondent after having been tortured, beaten and abandoned was turned out of matrimonial home on 08.02.2007 when the minor child had already been sent to Lucknow by the petitioner. The respondent is residing with her parents at Karnal. The respondent had also filed a complaint under Sections 406 & 498-A IPC, before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. An FIR also stands registered against the petitioner at Karnal. He was arrested by Karnal Police on 01.05.2007 and was released on bail on 03.05.2007. Another petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, is pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. The petitioner has also filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, at Ropar, though his residential address has been declared as 1433, Sector 34-C, Chandigarh. The respondent had filed a transfer application in the High Court for transferring the divorce petition from Ropar to Karnal.

(3.) IN reply filed to the petition for custody and interim visitation rights, the petitioner strongly challenged the territorial jurisdiction of the Guardian Judge, at Chandigarh, to entertain and decide the petition as the same was hit by Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act (for short the Act). It was claimed that the minor child Nitika ordinarily resides at Lucknow and is staying in Class III of Study Hall School, Vipul Khand II, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and the child is in the factual and constructive custody of Mrs.Radhika Malik, real sister of the petitioner as the minor child had been left by the respondent mother. In a very callous and indifferent manner she had abandoned her matrimonial home at Mohali, when the petitioner was away on tour while on official duty.