MANGU RAM Vs. PURAN MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is the maternal grand-father of the child Urmila aged about 7 years has moved this court by way of revision petition against the interim order dated 6.10.199 3 of Addl. District Judge Neem-Ka-Thana in Case No. 13/93 whereby the said court had directed the petitioner to hand-over the custody of female child Urmila to the father (non-petitioner) against whom investigation is reported to be pending with the local police on account of murder of his wife. The petitioner has sought the relief to the effect claiming that the custody of the said child who is already with the petitioner should continue to remain with him since the welfare, upkeep and further development of the said child has in no way been effected and he has made all sincere efforts to look after the said child in all possible manner to the best of his ability by looking after her health and education.

(2.) The facts which are relevant for deciding the controversy between the parties briefly stated are that the petitioner's late daughter Smt. Rama Devi was married to non-petitioner according to Hindu Rites and ceremony on 8th June 1987 at District Nagaur Rajasthan. The petitioner had done all his best according to his means to solemnize the marriage between the parties and marital relationship between the parties continued well for a short duration. A female child Urmila was born to the parties in the year 1989. After couple of years, marital relationship between the petitioner's late daughter Smt. Rama Devi and the respondent deteriorated and the reports were received by the petitioner regarding the alleged cruelty and inhuman behaviour of the respondent husband towards his daughter. It has been further contended in the petition that late Smt. Rama Devi died under mysterious circumstances and the petitioner was not even given any intimation regarding her death either by the non-petitioner nor by her in-laws and she was cremated by them in mysterious circumstances on 2nd April, 1993, Even the local police was informed regarding her mysterious death which created all suspicion about their conduct and their possible involvement.

(3.) As soon as the petitioner became aware of this fact, an FIR was lodged bearing N.o. 62/1993, under Sections 304-B and 498-AIPC with Police Station Khandela District Sikar by the petitioner against the respondent as well as the parent-in-laws. The petitioner has also contended in the petition that soon after the solemnisation of the marriage of his late daughter Smt. Rama Devi, her-in-laws use to make regular demands to the petitioner for dowry which he was unable to meet on account of meager resources and when the petitioner visited the marital home of his daughter late Smt. Rama Devi at her Village Kotari, he made inquiries with regard to the welfare of the minor child Miss Urmila and he found her in deteriorated state of health and insisted to take her alongwith him. Looking to the condition of his grand daughter he took the child alongwith him back to village Malsar in District Nagaur since he entertained the reasonable apprehension that the child may not meet the same fate as his late daughter. Soon thereafter, the petitioner preferred a petition before the learned District Judge. Neem Ka Thana wherein he sought and prayed for declaration that the guardianship of the said child Miss Urmila be handed over to him and he also gave assurance to the Court that he shall take all necessary steps for development and protection of the said child vide an application dated 15.10.1993 which is Annex.2 on the record. The application was moved under Section 10 read with Section 13 of the Guardians and Wards Act. 1958. The respondent on being, noticed by the learned Additional District Judge, Neem-Ka-Thana. contested the said petition on various grounds and had also sought a direction from the court that the custody of the child Miss Urmila be given to him. Learned trial court after hearing the detailed arguments of both the parties. passed an interim order on 6.10.1993 vide (Annexure-5) by which it was directed that the custody of the child Urmila should remain to continue with the father i.e. the non-petitioner herein. The trial court further directed that a sum of Rs. 25,000/- shall be deposited by the father i.e. non petitioner in the 14 years recurring account with any nationalised Bank and the said money shall be utilised for the welfare and upkeep of the said child. The non-petitioner was further directed that he shall produce the child Miss Urmila before the said court every month with a view to ascertain its welfare and development by the said court.