As per case facts, a married couple with a minor son is in a custody dispute. The wife initially secured custody via a Writ Petition, with visitation for the husband ...
No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
119 FAO-2617-2025 (O&M)
Reserved on: 03.11.2025
Pronounced on : 26.11.2025
Mansi Makkar
... Appellant
V/S
Ankur Shahi and others
... Respondents
261 FAO-2558-2025 (O&M)
Ankur Shahi
... Appellant
V/S
Mansi Makkar
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI
Present: Mr. Arpandeep Narula, Advocate
for the appellant in FAO-2617-2025 and
for the respondent in FAO-2558-2025
along with Mansi Makkar.
Mr. Arjun Veer Sharma, Advocate
for the appellant in FAO-2558-2025 and
for the respondent in FAO-2617-2025
along with Ankur Shahi.
***
RAMESH KUMARI, J.
1. FAO No. 2617 of 2025 (filed by Mansi Makkar) (hereinafter referred to
as wife) and FAO No. 2558 of 2025 (filed by Ankur Shahi and others)
(hereinafter referred to as husband and in-laws) are filed by the wife and
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -2-
husband respectively, against order dated 01.03.2025 in GW/50/2024
decided by the Family Court, Panchkula, vide which petition under
Section 7/25 of the Guardians and Ward Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred
as ‘GWA’) filed by husband and his parents against the wife seeking
custody of their minor son was dismissed, however, visitation rights have
been granted to the husband and in-laws of wife to the effect that:-
“However considering the fact that the husband is the
father and petitioners No.2 and 3 are the grandparents,
they are permitted to meet the minor child every week i.e.
from Friday evening till Sunday evening. Further, for this
purpose they will have to contact the respondent on
telephone, who as per her convenience and that of the
minor child will facilitate the same and the husband-father
shall pick the child from the house of the respondent on
Friday evening and drop the child at the house of the
respondent on Sunday evening. It is expected that the
respondent shall also cooperate in the aforesaid
arrangement.”
BACKGROUND OF LITIGATION BETWEEN HUSBAND
AND WIFE
2(a) Wife filed CRWP-7332-2022 (O&M) impleading State of Punjab and her
husband and in-laws as party. The prayer in the said CRWP (Annexure A-
1) filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India was for
issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to
produce her minor child who was less than 2 years (at the time of filing
petition) from the illegal detention of respondents No.4 to 6 (husband and
in-laws) and allow him to join the company of petitioner.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -3-
2(b) In the said CRWP she levelled allegation that on 23.07.2022, family
members of her husband quarreled with her and gave her beatings and
threw her out of matrimonial home while her son who was less than 2
years of age and dependent on mother’s feed was retained.
2(c) Single Bench of this Court allowed the said CRWP vide order dated
07.11.2022 and the local Police was directed to ensure the custody of
minor son is handed over by husband and in-laws to the wife
immediately in the presence of District Programme Officer, Department
of Social Security, Women and Child Development, Administrative
Complex, Malikpur Chowk, Pathankot-145025 or any officer authorised
by him and the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Shahpur Road, Pathankot-
145001 or any doctor authorised by him.
It was also directed that affidavit regarding compliance dated 07.11.2022
shall be furnished by the local Police to Single Bench of this Court within
one week of handing over the custody of minor child to petitioner.
Wife was directed to grant unfettered access to husband and in-laws
subject to convenience of both the parties keeping in view the welfare of
child.
It was also observed that aggrieved party would be at liberty to approach
appropriate Civil Court if so advised seeking custody of the child and if
such an application was moved, the said Court would proceed to decide
the same within a period of three months of filing of such an application
uninfluenced by observation made in the said order dated 07.11.2022
which had been made only to decide the said CRWP.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -4-
2(d) Husband filed SLP (Criminal) Diary No.35828/2022 against order dated
07.11.2022 before Hon’ble Apex Court which was dismissed vide order
dated 09.11.2022.
3. On 8.12.2024 husband and in-laws filed GW/50/2024 under Section 7/25
of the GWA before learned Family Court, seeking custody of minor child.
THE PLEADED CASE OF THE HUSBAND AND IN-LAWS
3(a) The husband and in-laws pleaded before the Family Court in petition that
marriage of husband was solemnized with wife on 04.12.2017. They
were blessed with male child on 20.08.2020, who is in custody of wife.
In the year 2017-18, husband was working at Noida and wife was
working at Gurugram and were residing together at Noida. In 2019, wife
started working in TSYS company where husband was already working.
In August 2020, husband and wife moved to Pathankot to the house of
parents of husband who had retired from Punjab Irrigation Department
and were getting pension.
In March 2021, the wife started pressurizing the husband to shift to
Noida and they came to Noida alongwith the minor son and resided there
till July 2021.
During that period, the wife neither took care of the minor son nor
provided proper diet and mother's feed due to which the minor son
suffered infection of eye and became weak and the husband got him
treated at a hospital in Noida.
The husband has also levelled allegation that the mental condition of the
wife was not good. She used to slap herself in anger and lock herself in
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -5-
bathroom for hours. The husband got her treated from various doctors but
there was no change in her behaviour.
In July 2021, the husband returned to Pathankot alongwith the wife and
the minor son.
On 23.07.2022, the wife left her matrimonial home and left the minor son
with the husband and in-laws and filed a dowry case at Panchkula on
26.07.2022.
On 29.07.2022, a Habeas Corpus writ petition was filed (as noted in para
No.2 of this order).
On 01.08.2022, the wife came to Ludhiana to snatch the minor son,
where the husband was staying at his relative's house and attacked him
with an iron object.
Husband filed a complaint to Ludhiana police. The husband produced the
medical records in Habeas Corpus petition before the High Court in
which the doctor found low mood, disturbed sleep, death wishes,
frequent anger outbursts and self harm behaviour, aggression, poor self
control, low IP Rein (illegible), depression to be sub-typed, adjustment
disorder, border line personality, bipolar disorder and the doctors advised
that the patient should be admitted in a psychiatry facility and sharp,
dangerous and poisonous substances to be kept away from her. The wife
appeared before the High Court and told that she did not receive any
treatment and the High Court took cognizance and directed the Senior
Superintendent of Police, Pathankot for investigation and all the reports
were found correct and the wife produced the Mental Health Act 2017
before the High Court.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -6-
Due to her mental condition, the wife used to give death threats and tried
to commit suicide and threatened the husband and in-laws to implicate
them in a false case and once she drank toilet cleaner as she could not
clear her IELTS exam.
On 12.07.2021, the husband and the wife alongwith the minor son went
to Lansdowne, Uttarakhand for two days and when they were coming to
Nainital in car, the wife started screaming and tried to jump out from the
car though the minor son was in her lap and the husband controlled the
vehicle and then took her to the nearest doctor.
On 11.11.2022, the husband and in-laws gave custody of the minor son to
the wife at police station, Sujanpur, District Pathankot, Punjab.
On 12.11.2022, the husband shifted to Panchkula and sent e-mails to the
wife for meeting the child and husband received summons of petition
under Domestic Violence Act.
On 22.11.2022, the husband filed a miscellaneous application before the
High Court for meeting the child but the wife refused to compromise in
the Mediation Center and it was decided by the High Court that daily
time should be fixed to meet the child and an agreement took place
between the wife and the husband where it was decided that the husband
and in-laws would meet the minor child for 3 hours daily between 01.00
p.m. to 06.00 p.m. Final order was passed by the High Court on
24.01.2023
One day, husband dropped the minor son at wife's house and asked the
wife if she could take the minor son to the Mickey Mouse ride as the
minor son insisted but the wife started shouting loudly outside her house
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -7-
and he returned back and the wife gave a complaint at 112 but the
husband told that he did not engage in any fight.
On 03.04.2023, the wife send an E-mail to husband that she has to join
her office on 17.04.2023 at Noida. The husband asked the wife that since
she would be in the office, the minor son can stay with them during her
absence but she refused.
The husband observed several times that when the minor son stays with
the wife, he gets serious injuries.
On 13.04.2023, the husband and in-laws filed another miscellaneous
application in the Habeas Corpus case before the High Court which was
dismissed vide order dated 20.04.2023 and then they filed Letter Patent
Appeal before the High Court.
On 20.05.2023, the wife left from Panchkula to Noida alongwith the
minor son without informing the husband and in-laws and send an e-mail
after reaching there. On 29.05.2023, she provided her Noida address to
the husband.
On 12.06.2023, the husband and in-laws shifted to Noida and rented a
house.
The wife told the husband that if he withdrew the LPA, she would
handover the minor son during her office hours. The husband and in-laws
withdrew the LPA on 02.08.2023.
When the wife was asked to handover the minor son during office hours
to the husband, she started fighting and told that nothing had been
decided in writing and she would not hand over child for more than three
hours.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -8-
The husband and in-laws used to bring the minor son to their home for
three hours every day. The husband requested the wife to visit schools for
the future of minor son but the wife refused.
The husband is willing to do everything for the minor son as he has
always been concerned about the minor son as when the child used to
visit the husband and in-laws everyday, they spent quality time with him
and celebrated his birthday every week.
On several occasions, the minor son told the husband and in-laws that
his mother beats him. One day the husband and in-laws noticed finger
marks on his face and when they asked the wife, she became angry and
told that she would not give the minor son for meeting.
The husband noticed that the child had severe rashes and redness and
took him to the hospital and the doctor told that it was due to lack of
hygiene and prescribed medicines and the husband told the wife but she
refused to give medication.
On 17.10.2023, the husband noticed that there was no improvement in
the condition of the child and took him to a pediatrician who prescribed
medicines and emphasized for maintaining proper hygiene of the child.
Whenever the husband brought the minor child, he often noticed marks
on his body and the child repeatedly used to say that his mother beats
him and pulls his hair.
On 01.11.2023, the husband gave complaint to police chowki Sector
63A, Baholpur, Noida but they refused to accept it. Husband went to the
office of Police Commissioner who marked the complaint to SHO, Police
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -9-
Station, Sector-63, Noida and told the husband and in-laws to seek help
from Child Welfare Committee.
On 06.11.2023, the husband gave a written complaint to Child Welfare
Committee and then went to the police station for legal action but in vain.
The husband was called to police station, Bahalolpur, Sector-63A, Noida
but the incharge humiliated him and created a false report in collusion
with the wife and submitted it to the Police Commissioner and closed the
case and fabricated a false case under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. which was
dismissed by the court of the Assistant Police Commissioner.
On 07.02.2024, the husband went to police station Sector-39, Noida and
obtained a copy of Diary Entry No. 68 Ankur Shahi and Ors. Vs Mansi
Makkar registered on 22.11.2023.
On 12.12.2023, the husband picked up the minor son from the house of
the wife and noticed a deep wound behind the right ear of the child with
bleeding and took him to hospital and asked the wife and she told that the
minor son got injured at school and after treatment, he went to drop the
minor son at the house of wife and asked her the reason for not getting
minor son treated but she became angry. The minor son sustained injury
due to the wife’s lack of attention. The wife did not take care to treat him
and when the husband came to pick up the minor son, wife did not
inform him about the said injury.
On 09.02.2024, the Child Welfare Committee summoned the husband
and the wife and their documents were reviewed by the committee and
the case was kept under consideration for further proceedings.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -10-
On 10.02.2024, the husband sent a message to the wife for picking up the
child but the wife told that if he wanted to meet the minor son, it would
only be in the presence of the wife or another person and she blocked
mobile number of the husband.
The husband and in-laws went to police station, Sector-63, Noida and
showed the orders of the High Court which had granted unfettered access
to meet the child. The Police sent a female police officer with the
husband and in-laws but the wife refused to hand over the child.
The wife was called on 12.02.2024 to police station but she flatly
refused.
The husband and in-laws went to the house of the wife but she did not
open the gate and the husband called the police at 112 for assistance. The
Police called the wife and she informed that she was out of station and
would return in two weeks.
On 13.02.2024, the husband gave a complaint to Police Commissioner,
Noida and Station In-Charge of Sector-63, Noida though E-mail but no
action was taken.
The Child Welfare Committee called the wife to appear with the minor
son on 19.02.2024 but she did not appear.
The husband went to the minor son's school and he was informed that the
wife had withdrawn the child from the school and the husband asked if
the school had informed the wife about the injury sustained by the minor
son on 12.12.2023 but the school refused to provide any information.
On 27.02.2024, the husband sent legal notice to the school and also
notified the Basic Education Officer of Noida. The school informed that
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -11-
the child was on leave from the school when the injury occurred and was
under mother's care and provided a letter from the wife and video of the
statement of the wife given to the school.
On 16.03.2024, the husband emailed the wife asking about whereabouts
as husband and in-laws wanted to meet the child and the wife told that
she had permanently shifted to Panchkula and would not allow the
husband and in-laws to meet the minor son until they obtained further
court orders for visitation.
On 19.03.2024, the Child Welfare Committee submitted the investigation
report.
The behaviour of the wife has changed significantly since the birth of the
minor son and is not doing her duties as mother and is not at all
concerned about the welfare, physical and mental development,
education and bright future of the child and inflicts cruelty upon him and
has never provided stability to the minor son rather removed him from
the Pathankot school and then from Panchkula and then from Noida.
The husband and in-laws also alleged that wife is a modern woman who
remains busy with her lifestyle, parties and nightclubs and often returned
late at night under the influence of alcohol. The husband holds a B. Tech
degree and is employed in an American company. The husband is
allowed him to work from home and receives a good salary and can
provide all facilities to the minor child. His parents retired from Punjab
Irrigation Department and get pension. Husband and in-laws are fully
dedicated to the bright future of the minor child and prayed for grant of
custody of the minor child to them.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -12-
THE PLEADED CASE OF THE WIFE
4. The wife in written reply admitted the marriage and birth of child and the
factum that the child is living with her.
The wife contested the petition by raising preliminary objections
regarding maintainability, locus standi and cause of action.
The wife alleged that she was turned out of matrimonial home. The
parents of the wife had spent about Rs.35 lacs on marriage and gave
sufficient jewellery, car etc as per the demand of the husband and in-
laws. They kept all her belongings in their custody.
The wife further alleged that on the first night i.e. 05.12.2017, the
husband came in a drunkard condition and started quarrelling with her
that her parents have not fulfilled their demand of dowry and slapped her.
The wife told him that her parents have already given all the things but
he did not pay any heed.
On 06.12.2017, the wife talked to the mother of the husband but she also
started abusing her.
On 07.12.2017, the wife and the husband moved to Noida, but the
husband did not mend his ways and taunted and humiliated her.
After one month of marriage, the in-laws also moved to Noida and
started interfering in their life.
The husband refused to spend anything on household articles, rather told
the wife to contribute her half salary if she wanted to live with him and
used to take her salary and did not give single penny to her.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -13-
Her in-laws started harassing her on demand of dowry and she told her
mother who told them that they have already spent huge amount on
marriage but the husband and in-laws did not pay any heed.
The wife had to travel from Noida to Gurgaon and spent three hours in
travelling and requested the husband to take accommodation at Gurgaon
or nearby but he refused and physically assaulted her.
On 14.08.2018, the husband under the influence of liquor, beat the wife
mercilessly and she called her maternal uncle who took her and got her
treated. The husband came there and felt sorry and the wife joined her
matrimonial home but thereafter, he again started harassing and
humiliating her and she remained under depression.
The husband always taunted the wife either to divorce him or to finish
her life by suicide and made her life hell and under forced circumstances,
she poured harpic and the husband took her to hospital and asked her to
save him from criminal proceedings and assured that he would treat her
nicely and the wife gave a false statement in the hospital.
The behaviour of the husband and in-laws was normal for some days but
thereafter, they again started harassing and humiliating her.
On 25.11.2019, the brother of the wife came to India and went to meet
the husband but husband beat him.
In July 2020, the wife was left alone at the house as the husband went to
Pathankot to bring his parents to Noida and assured that he would come
within three days but he neither informed her nor returned rather stayed
for six days. The wife fell ill but there was no one to take care of her.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -14-
When the husband and in-laws came to Noida, the husband snatched her
entire salary. The husband gave beatings to her when she was pregnant.
The wife was blessed with male child on 20.08.2020. All the expenses of
his birth were borne by her. Due to Covid-19, her parents could not
come. After some days, her parents came to Noida but the husband
started quarreling and insulted them on the demand of gold and forced
her parents to leave the house.
The husband did not pay any attention to the minor child and used to beat
him and did not allow her to take the minor child. On Chola ceremony of
the minor child at Pathankot, the parents of the wife gave gold items etc.
but the demand of the husband and in-laws increased and they again
started demanding more dowry and the wife came to her parental home
and informed her parents. Her father tried to convince the husband to
treat her nicely but he started quarreling with him but later on the
husband and in-laws came and felt sorry and took the wife with them and
on reaching her matrimonial home, the husband and in-laws gave
beatings to her and she saved her life by locking herself in the bathroom.
Thereafter, the wife and the husband came to Noida and in the second
wave of Covid-19, the husband started pressurizing her to go to
Pathankot and when she refused, he slapped her.
The wife used to work from home and was made to do all the house hold
work.
On 22.07.2022, the company of the wife called her back to the job and
she requested the husband to return to Noida but he started quarreling
with her and gave her beatings.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -15-
On 23.07.2022, the sister of the husband came and gave slaps to her and
thereafter, she was turned out of the matrimonial house. She was not
allowed to take her minor child and belongings. When the wife reached
her parental house at Panchkula, she tried to settle the matter but the
husband and in-laws refused and threatened them. The wife
lodged an FIR No. 503 under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, 506 IPC against
the husband and also filed a writ of Habeas Corpus before the High Court
(as noted in para No.2 of this order).
The wife is doing job at TSYS at Noida and is getting salary
of Rs.2 lacs per month while the husband was earlier doing job at
Cognizant Company and was getting Rs.2 lacs per month but now he is is
not doing any job and is dependent upon his parents.
The wife requested the husband to maintain her but he flatly refused and
so she filed a petition under Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005.
The minor child is admitted in Sky World School, Sector-21, Panchkula
and the wife is bearing all his expenses and her mother also retired and is
getting pension. The husband used to take the child with him for three
hours in a day and used to provoke him to go against wife.
The husband and in-laws have procured false reports against her only to
get the custody of the minor child but the High Court has also held that
the husband and in-laws have failed to prove that the wife is ill rather she
is doing job in Multi-National company.
The husband and in-laws are creating hurdles in upbringing of the minor
child and provoking him against the wife by taking undue benefit of their
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -16-
visiting hours but being mother, she is fully attached with the child and is
taking proper care of the child. She prayed for dismissal of the petition.
ISSUES AS FRAMED BY LEARNED TRIAL COURT
5.For adjudication of custody matter between the parties, learned trial
Court framed following three issues:-
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the custody of minor
child as prayed for? OPP.
2. Whether the petition is not maintainable in the present
form? OPR
3. Relief.
6. Both the parties led evidence in support of their respective case and after
hearing the arguments, learned Family Court decided both issues against
the petitioners and dismissed the petition and granted visitation rights as
noted above in para No.2.
HUSBAND AND WIFE EDUCATED, INTELLIGENT AND
WORKING IN I.T. SECTOR
7. It is conceded during the course of arguments that both husband and wife
are working in IT sector and both work from home. Presently both are
living in Panchkula. During the proceedings of hearing of both these
appeals, this Court interacted with husband and wife, both the parties
seem intelligent, well educated, earning well and protective parents
towards minor son.
ARGUMENTS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR WIFE
8(a). Mr. Arpandeep Narula, Advocate for the wife contended that since the
child has to go to school daily and has to do homework, it is not possible
to afford weekly visiting rights to the husband and in-laws and the same
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -17-
is not even in the welfare of the child and it will affect his study, mental
and physical well-being .
8(b) The Family Court by allowing the minor child to stay in the house of
husband and in-laws from Friday evening to Sunday evening has
virtually granted custody of minor son to the husband and in-laws during
those days and that in such arrangement, the child cannot adjust for full
week because he has to live in two different environments.
8(c) The husband is tutoring the child against wife and maternal grandmother
and minor son uses abusive language towards his mother and maternal
grandparents when he returns from husband’s house.
8(d) The child associates his mother with discipline and study and since on
weekends, the child is to remain with husband, he associates his father
and paternal grandparents with enjoyment and leisure time.
8(e) The wife is doing her level best to provide all the necessities and comfort
to her child, but the husband and in-laws in order to create evidence
against the wife, are coining stories of mental and physical stress and
alleged injuries to the child by time and again taking child to doctors and
psychiatrist.
8(f) The husband is also bent upon to declare the wife as mentally sick and
depressed by creating false evidence and concocting the documents
against her. All the medical record is fabricated by the husband only to
get the custody of child. The wife never got any treatment from PW-10
Dr. Saket Tiwari, and the husband and father’s name of the patient is not
mentioned in the record produced by PW10 neither he can identify the
patient.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -18-
8(g) The wife always take care of emotional, mental and physical well-being
of the child. The husband is bent upon to spoil the life of the child for the
simple reason that his attitude towards his wife is hostile and the best
interest of the child is if the child is allowed to stay permanently with the
wife and the child is allowed to meet her husband and in-laws once in a
fortnight and may be during his school vacation.
Learned counsel for the wife vehemently prayed for modification in the
impugned order by reducing the visitation time of minor child with the
husband and in-laws.
ARGUMENTS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE HUSBAND
AND IN-LAWS
9(a). Mr. Arjun Veer Sharma, Advocate for the husband and in-laws contended
that they are ready to swap the days of custody of the minor child and
have no objection if the minor child is allowed to stay with them from
Sunday evening to Friday evening and allowed to stay with wife from
Friday evening to Sunday evening.
9(b) The wife had levelled false allegations against the husband regarding
demand of dowry and physical beating.
9(c) Minor son is very happy with husband and in-laws of wife. In support of
his contention, Mr. Arjun Veer Sharma, Advocate relied upon
photographs Annexures P-229 to P-237. In one of these photographs,
child is outside the door of the house and mother is to take him, but
the child is under distress and cries when he is separated from the
father as is reflected from photographs Annexure P-238 to P-254.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -19-
9(d) The child is suffering from anxiety and behavioral issues and for this
purpose, the husband has to take the child to Dr. Rajeev Trehan for
psycho analysis and in support of his contention, learned counsel for the
husband and in-laws has also referred to Annexure P-21. The behavior of
child changed and he shows less signs of mental stress and anxiety when
he was engaged in dance classes on 03.10.2025.
9(e). The wife is unfit to be primary caregiver as she suffers from anxiety,
depression, behavioral issues and suicidal tendencies. In support of his
contention, learned counsel for the husband and in-laws placed reliance
upon the testimony of PW-10 Dr. Saket Tiwari, Consultant Psychiatrist,
District MMG Hospital, Ghaziabad, examined before Family Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-husband contended that PW-10 Dr.
Saket Tiwari, treated Mansi on 04.10.2021 and she disclosed to this
doctor that she was suffering from low mood, disturbed sleep, death
wishes, frequent anger, outburst and self harm behaviour. PW-10 also
stated that she disclosed that she caused self harm by ingesting harpic
and she also disclosed that she caused self harm by beating herself many
times. After that, she was prescribed medicines for elevating her mood
and good sleep. PW-10 further stated that again on 16.06.2021, he
attended patient and proved prescription slip Ex.P10/2 and identified his
signatures on Ex.P10/A. As per his further testimony, on 16.06.2021
patient told him that she has got no improvement and further stated that
her aggressive behavior has increased and she is not able to take proper
care of herself and further states that she remained sad continuously.
PW-10 deposed that after examining patient, he noticed that patient might
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -20-
be suffering from depression or adjustment disorder. He advised the
patient to get admitted in hospital but she refused. He further advised her
that till she do not get herself admitted in hospital, she requires 24X7
observation of any person (family member). She was also given a
counseling session by him and also increased the dose of medicine. The
said doctor is practicing since October, 2017 in Hospital District MMG,
Ghaziabad and OPD entry of the register was also seen and proved on
record by him. Relying upon the abovesaid testimony of PW-10 Dr. Saket
Tiwari, learned counsel for the husband and in-laws contended that wife
is unable to take care of herself and she cannot be primary caregiver and
guardian of the child and it is not for the welfare of the child, if he
continues in the custody of wife, who is suffering from psychiatric issues.
9(f) Learned counsel for the husband and in-laws also relied upon social
inquiry report (Ex.P-18) in which it is noticed that the child needs
supervision, security because the mother of the child is not giving him
enough time and during inquiry it was found that the child has more
affection for father and insists on going with father and on conversation
with the child, he informed that his mother often scares him and when he
commit any mischief, she beats him and for the appropriate development
of child, he needs congenial atmosphere.
Learned counsel for the husband and in-laws also referred report Ex.P-
21, which was submitted before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Gautambudh Nagar by Child Welfare Committee, wherein committee
interacted with mother and child and the child without any questioning
and before any talk, voluntarily started saying that mother gave beatings
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -21-
to him and he expressed the same by tapping his cheek but before child
could have said anything more, his mother and grandmother asked the
child to keep quiet. In this report Ex.P-21, there was also reference of
report Ex.P-18, as discussed above.
9(g) The child suffered injury in the school, but the wife did not immediately
take him to the nearest hospital and rather took him to the hospital, which
was far away from her house and not the hospital which was nearby.
When the child was not provided proper medical treatment, he was given
medical treatment by the husband as proved from prescription slip
Ex.P3/1 dated 28.09.2023.
9(h) The wife has shifted child from one school to another time and again and
the husband also had to shift his residence to meet the child. Because of
the frequent shifting of the school of the child, the child suffers from
anxiety and behavioral issues.
9(i) Since the child is now more than 5 years of age, father is natural guardian
of the child, husband is entitled for custody of child.
9(j) Learned counsel for husband and in-laws also relied upon the paper-
book prepared by NGO namely “Child Rights Foundation” describing
with the title “Child Access & Custody Guidelines along with Parenting
Plan, UN Convention on the Rights of the Child”, which is duly adopted
by the Government of India on 11.12.1992, being signatory to the said
convention on the rights of child, judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in
(i) Dr. Ashish Ranjan Versus Dr. Anupama Tandon and another, Law
Finder Doc Id # 229081; (ii) Gaurav Nagpal Versus Sumedha Nagpal,
Law Finder Doc Id # 162826; (iii) Nil Ratan Kundu and another
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -22-
Versus Abhijit Kundu, Law Finder Doc Id # 145157; (iv) Hardeep
Singh Versus Paramjeet Kaur, Law Finder Doc Id # 1713034; (v)
Roxann Sharma Versus Arun Sharma, Law Finder Doc ID # 651535;
and (vi) Neethu B. @ Neethu Baby Methew Versus Rajesh Kumar,
Law Finder Doc Id # 2750880.
DISCUSSION
10. The issued raised by the parties to both the appeals can be discussed
under following heads:-
(i) Can the custody of child be granted to husband since the child is
presently more than five years?
10(a) As noted earlier, the date of birth of the child is 20.08.2020 and the child
celebrated his 5
th
birthday on 20.08.2025. Full time custody of the child
cannot be given to the husband for the simple reason that child is now
more than five years of age and the father is natural and legal guardian of
the child. Simply because the child has crossed the age of 5 years, wife
cannot be disqualified to the custody of the child. Reference can be
made herein to the observation of Hon’ble Apex Court in Roxann
Sharma’s case cited (supra) at para 12
“12. The HMG Act postulates that the custody of an
infant or a tender aged child should be given to his/her
mother unless the father discloses cogent reasons that
are indicative of and presage the livelihood of the
welfare and interest of the child being undermined or
jeopardised if the custody retained by the mother.
Section 6(a) of HMG Act, therefore, preserves the right
of the father to be the guardian of the property of the
minor child but not the guardian of his person whilst
the child is less than five years old. It carves out the
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -23-
exception of interim custody, in contradistinction of
guardianship, and then specifies that custody should
be given to the mother so long as the child is below
five years in age. We must immediately clarify that this
Section or for that matter any other provision
including those contained in the G&W Act, does not
disqualify the mother to custody of the child even after
the latter's crossing the age of five years.”
(ii) Whether wife is mentally and physically disabled to look after the
child
10(b).Learned counsel for the husband and in-laws has laid much stress on the
testimony of PW-10 Dr. Saket Tiwari, Consultant Psychiatrist District
MMG Hospital, Ghaziabad to prove that the wife is suffering from
psychiatric issues and she got herself treated from him.
Cross-examination of PW-10, Dr. Saket Tiwari, is vital piece of evidence.
During cross-examination, he stated that he does not know Mansi
Makkar personally. He had not obtained the signature of Mansi Makkar
on any document. He also admitted as correct that documents from Ex.
P10/1 to Ex. P10/4, he cannot verify the identity of patient Mansi
Makkar. He admitted as correct that in column of s/w/o at Point ‘A’ to
‘A1’, ‘B’ to ‘B1’, point ‘C’ to ‘C1’ point ‘D’ to ‘D1’ of Ex. P10/1 to
Ex.P10/4, there is no where mentioned name of husband/father as well as
address of alleged patient. PW10 Dr. Saket Tiwari, voluntarily added that
they do not take any Aadhaar Card of the patient in OPD. He also
admitted as correct that any patient can come to hospital and whether
he/she disclose his/her wrong name, they do not inquire about the same.
He also voluntarily stated that the OPD card is being prepared by OPD
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -24-
clerical staff. He further admitted as correct that Ex.P10/3 and Ex.P10/4
are photocopies and same were not prepared by him. Same were prepared
by OPD staff. Another fact admitted by PW-10 Dr. Saket Tiwari, is that
Ex.P10/3 and Ex.P10/4 were not attested and signed by him and
voluntarily stated that same were attested and signed by Incharge of
MRD. He also admitted as correct that the patient has not made any
declaration/summary in written to him regarding the fact as disclosed by
him in his chief examination from point ‘E’ to ‘E1’ and he voluntarily
stated that he has mentioned the same as stated by patient or attendant.
He had no record regarding payment slip of patient and he voluntarily
stated that same is of Rs.1, which remained with clerical department of
OPD.
Since the OPD slips were prepared and issued by the OPD staff, it was
imperative for the husband to examine the said staff to prove that the
patient who came for treatment from PW10 Dr. Saket Tiwari, was Mansi
Makkar of this case and no other Mansi Makkar especially when not
even Aadhaar Card was obtained while issuing OPD slip. The record
produced in the statement of PW-10 Dr. Saket Tiwari, became all the
more suspicious for reason that the father’s or husband’s name or address
of the patent is not mentioned in these slips, therefore, this medical
record is of no help to the husband and in-laws that Mansi Makkar has
suffered from any psychiatric issues like low mood, self harm, suicidal
thoughts, aggression etc., making her unsuitable to take care of her minor
son. During cross-examination, Mansi Makkar, wife admitted as correct
that her husband had produced the record of depression before the Family
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -25-
Court and she voluntarily added that the record does not pertain to her
because she never went to the said doctor. Therefore, the oral testimony
of the husband in the absence of medical record cannot be considered
trustworthy and the learned trial Court rightly held that husband failed to
prove that the wife suffers from any medical issues. Meaning thereby, it
cannot be held that wife is mentally and physically disabled to look after
the child.
Relevancy of reports Exs.P18 and P21 to determine custody issue of
minor
10(c).With the assistance of learned counsel for both the parties, we have gone
through Ex.P18 the social investigation report for child in need of care
and protection and report Ex.P-21 of Child Welfare Committee. These
reports prove that only wife was subjected to strict scrutiny by Child
Welfare Committee and the capability of the father to up bring the child
and to be a primary caregiver was never discussed and determined. Child
Welfare Committee noted that “child needs care and protection as child’s
mother is not giving time to her son”. Regarding recommendations of
Child Welfare Committee, in Ex.P-18, it is noted that “during the onsite
investigation, it was noticed that child is very attached to his father and
he loves him very much. The child keeps insisting on staying with his
father. When we talked to the child, he told us that his mother often
scares him and beats him and when he acts naughty. For proper
development of child, he needs harmonious environment”. In Ex.P-21,
inquiry report by Child Welfare Committee, findings of report Ex.P-18
above referred are stated and this report further throws light that the
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -26-
Committee interacted with the wife Mansi Makkar and it was also
observed by the Committee that “the committee conversed with child for
a considerable time in a child friendly environment. Child told the
committee that he likes to go to school and likes to go out with his father
and he wants to live with his father. The child’s behaviour in front of
committee was observed to be very playful, active and focused, but there
was difficulty in controlling him. Apart from this, his mother was also
seen having difficulty in controlling him during his presence before the
committee.”
The issue of mental health of wife i.e mother of the child, was also raised
before Child Welfare Committee by the husband and from the contents of
this report Ex.P-21, it is proved that wife was questioned at length by the
Child Welfare Committee, whereas the applicant before the said
committee i.e. the husband simply appeared before the committee on
04.03.2024 and produced the order (rendered in CRWP No.7332 of 2022,
dated 07.11.2022) as well as settlement agreement signed by him and
wife before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and after
detailed discussion with him, Committee informed him that his wife
along with son have relocated at her native place Panchkula, Haryana and
he can meet his son at Panchkula as per order of this Court. The
committee gave special instructions to the wife to take proper care of her
son and there should not be any negligence in his safety and protection.
The husband was also directed by the Committee to make his necessary
contribution in the upbringing of his son. This report proved that each
and every issue raised by the husband was taken up by the Committee
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -27-
and the wife was confronted regarding giving less time to the child and
not providing medical care. Since custody of the child was given to wife
vide order dated 07.11.2022 passed in |CRWP-7332-2022 (O&M) by this
Court and the child was allowed to spent 3 hours with father and 21
hours with mother. The child used to spent maximum time with mother. It
is natural for the child to be resentful towards mother, who has to instruct
the child for his behaviour and study and sometimes the activities of the
child needs to be controlled to save him from any injury as the child is
stated to be naughty in a report Ex.P-21. Therefore, these reports are not
much relevant to determine the custody issue of minor child between
estranged couple.
Whether wife is negligent to be primary care giver of son?
10(d).The contention of learned counsel for the husband and in-laws is that wife
is unable to give much time to the child and the child was not provided
timely medical intervention for injuries sustained by him during school
time. Regarding this, cross-examination of wife before Family Court is
material piece of evidence. RW-1 Mansi Makkar during cross-
examination stated that in December, 2023, her son suffered injury while
jumping on trampoline. At that time, the child was in her custody and he
was playing in school playground. She also stated that he suffered injury
during recess time and she noticed the same when school was over and
she had gone to pick him from school. It was about 12 noon. There were
minor scratches on the rear of his ear but she was unable to disclose
when or on which ear and she further stated that on the said day, she
remained with her son and did not go to office on that day. She also
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -28-
stated that when child suffered injury on the nose with iron pipe, she had
worked from home and her timings remained flexible. On the said day,
she did not got her son injected with tetanus and took her son in the
evening at about 6-7 pm in the evening to the doctor. The prescription of
the doctor was not produced by her at the time of her cross-examination
and she stated that she cannot produce the same. She denied the
suggestion that she had not intentionally got the child diagnosed from the
doctor for the reason that she has no love and affection with the child and
remained busy in the office work. She denied the suggestion that on
22.11.2023, her son suffered injury on the face. She admitted that her son
was got checked by the husband from doctor and she added that on the
said day, she handed over the child to husband, when he was laughing
and enjoying with the husband for three hours and she does not know
where the husband took him or the child suffered any injury. She also
stated that when the child came in the evening (on the said day) he was
not having any injury. She also admitted that she sent one video to
Principal of the school regarding trampoline incident and she added that
she received telephone of the Principal that in her absence, the father of
the child has sent legal notice to the school and for this reason, she sent
the video that at the time of incident, child was in her custody and in the
said video, she told that when the child was playing on the trampoline, he
suffered minor injury and injury is suffered when he was in her custody
and school is not responsible for it. She also admitted writing letter Ex.P-
14/2 regarding this to the school and on the next day of incident, her son
attended the school. She denied the suggestion that on the next day her
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -29-
son did not attend the school because he suffered serious injuries. At
another stage of her cross-examination, she admitted documents Ex.P-21
regarding injury on the right eye, which child suffered while running in
November, 2024 when while running he stuck himself on the nob of door
and the child suffered 2-3 stitches at that time and it was done at about
9:00 pm. They (Mansi Makkar and her family) took him to Civil hospital
in Sector 6, Panchkula. She also admitted that one Ojas Hospital is near
to her house and she stated that they always visit Civil Hospital, Sector 6,
and further added that when something major happened then they visit
Government Hospital, Sector 6, Panchkula. She also admitted that Ojas
Hospital is 1 km from her house and she voluntarily added that they have
not heard good about Ojas Hospital. She also stated that Civil Hospital,
Sector 6, Panchkula is 9-10 km away from her house.
The learned counsel for the husband and in-laws referred the prescription
slip Ex.P3/3 to support his contention that husband took the child to the
hospital and wife is negligent in providing timely and proper medical
care.
With the able assistance of learned counsel for the husband and in-laws,
we have gone through the contents of the prescription slip dated
28.09.2023, Ex.P3/1, which is of Shanti Gopal Hospital, pertaining to
child diagnosed for rearer injury in perineal area and the prescription
provided by the doctor is “candid powder” twice a day for 7 days and
with a direction to “keep the area clean and dry”. Candid powder or
ointment is provided by the doctors for common rashes. The allegation
that the husband himself took the child to doctor for providing him
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -30-
proper medical care which was not provided by the wife cannot be
accepted. Every person in childhood suffers from scratches, bruise while
playing, running, jumping and it is a part and parcel of growing up.
Prescription slip Ex.P4/3 dated 17.10.2023 is about that child suffers rash
in perineal area, also complained about abdomen pain, no fever, decrease
in appetite, not gaining weight. The doctor prescribed to maintain
hygiene and syrup Beevon was prescribed with few other medicines.
Taking the child for minor rashes to the doctor, reveals that the husband
is blowing the health condition out of proportion. Taking the child time
and again to the medical practitioner for minor rashes and under the
pretext that child has no appetite or not gaining weight is not beneficial
for the overall well being of the child. There is nothing on record what
was the ideal weight of the child of his age and what was the actual
weight of the child at that time. In the absence of this record, it cannot be
believed that the child was under-weight when he was taken to doctor,
who issued prescription slip Ex.P4/3 dated 17.10.2023. There is tendency
in the children to complain of abdominal pain when they are not willing
to indulge in any particular task.
Certain other prescription slips are also relied upon by learned counsel
for the husband and in-laws. Prescription slip dated 28.08.2025 reflects
that “five year old child shows strong emotional attachment to his father
and signs of distress around the mother, who appears emotionally
traumatized. For the child’s emotional well being and stability it is
advisable, he remain in father’s care. This will support healthier
development and reduce the impact of parental conflict”. In prescription
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -31-
slip of 21.09.2025, when the child was taken for second session, there is
also noting of the Doctor that “the child displayed strong attachment to
one caregiver and dislikes around the other. For emotional stability,
continued care with the primary attachment figure is recommended.
Caregivers are encouraged to participate in joint therapeutic activities to
support emotional bonding and promote the child’s healthy
development.” Learned counsel for the husband also relied upon the
prescription slip dated 28.09.2025, wherein the child underwent for third
session before Dr. Rajeev Trehan, and wherein it is observed that “third
session focused on emotional well being. Session conducted with Father.
Continued support provided for R’s emotional regulation and behavioral
needs. Psycho education given to the father regarding child emotional
development, co-regulation strategies, and the importance of a
supportive home environment. He continues to display a negative
attitude towards the mother, which was gently addressed during the
sessions. Advised further session to monitor R’s progress and provide
ongoing parental guidance and emotional support.” The prescription slip
dated 05.10.2025 reflects that “the child is currently engaged in regular
routine activities, including dance and art classes. No behavioral
concerns were observed during the session. It is recommended that
sessions continue as planned.”
The child is taken to Dr. Rajeev Trehan, during the pendency of the
present appeals by the husband. The wife did not get the opportunity to
conduct cross examination upon Dr. Rajeev Trehan, and for this reason,
these prescription slips are of no use to determine the mental and
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -32-
physical state of the child. The medical record produced by the husband
before learned Family Court is just of minor rashes suffered by the child,
which every child suffers as a part of growing up. If the minor rashes or
bruises on the body of a child are blown out of proportion, the child is
likely to develop fear of taking risk in life and can develop kinesiophobia
(excessive and irrational fear of physical activity) and cannot be a
decisive adult. The child cannot be kept in a cozy physical and comfort
zone and every child as observed earlier suffers bruises and rashes while
growing up so is the child in this case who is naughty and hyper active,
as noted by the Child Welfare Committee, in report Ex.P-21 is bound to
have minor rashes, falls, injuries while running and playing. On this
score, the wife cannot be held negligent to provide medical care to the
child or not being able to be a primary caregiver.
Effect of change of schools on the child-
10(e).Learned counsel for the husband and in-laws also blamed wife for
repeatedly changing school of the child to deprive them of having access
to the child. RW1 wife when subjected to cross examination stated that
first she got her child admitted in Playway Little Champ School in
November, 2022 and thereafter, in July, 2023 in Little Sun Play School,
and after that in November, 2024 in Sky World, Sector 21, Panckula and
the classes were started in April, 2024. She also stated that when she got
her child admitted in said school, she did not take permission of the
husband and never discussed it with him and she added that she has got
the custody of the child by the order of High Court and has not claimed
any maintenance for this reason, the consent was not obtained. She has
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -33-
not got recorded the name of the father of the child in any document and
because she told the Principal that she got the custody through High
Court and in the Identity Card receipt of the child, she got the father’s
name entered and the dealing hand informed that it is her choice to get
father’s name recorded.
This part of her cross-examination reveal that the child’s school from
November, 2022 to February, 2024, were changed three times. When the
lady shifted from Noida to Panchkula, it was necessary for her to change
the school and the first school of the child was from November, 2022 to
July, 2023, and then from July, 2023 to February, 2024, at that time, the
child was too young. The child is studying in Sky World School Sector
21, Panchkula since February, 2024 and it cannot be said or concluded
that the decision of the wife for change of school is not for the benefit of
child. Parents experiment with the school and whatever school is found
suitable for the child, the said school is opted for continuous study.
Change of three schools by her means that that she must have paid fee
time and again to the schools for the said admissions. No document
worth the name is brought on record by the husband that he ever paid for
the studies of the child or because of change of the school, personality of
the child suffers. Rather the child suffers from anxiety and because he
has to shift from one environment to another within 7 days i.e. from
Sunday evening to Friday evening with mother and school and from
Friday evening to Sunday evening with his father and apparently with
paternal grandparents who celebrate his birthday every week and shower
him with gifts.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -34-
Guidelines and Case Law cited by learned counsel for the husband
and in-laws
11. With the able assistance of learned counsel for both the parties, we have
gone through the contents of the guidelines pertaining to the custody of
the child along with parental plan as complied by NGO namely Child
Rights Foundation and the Union Nations Convention on the Rights of
the Child. We have also gone through the judgments produced on record.
In Dr. Ashish Ranjan’s case cited (supra), Hon’ble Apex Court found the
mother guilty of contempt. In the said case, the custody of the minor
child was given to the mother and the mother touted the child to make
him hostile towards father and frustrated the visiting rights of father.
In Gaurav Nagpal’s case (supra), Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that
paramount consideration is the welfare of child and not rights of parents
under the statute.
In Nil Ratan Kundu’s case (supra), the Apex Court declined the custody
of minor child aged about 6 years in favour of father by holding that
although father is natural guardian but father facing a criminal trial and
custody was given to maternal grand-parents as per the wishes of child
and considering the welfare of child.
In Hardeep Singh’s case (supra), it was observed by Hon’ble Apex Court
that wife cannot prevent the child from receiving any gift that may be
given by the husband.
In Roxann Sharma’s case (supra) interim custody of the minor child
below 5 years was given to the mother, who was highly qualified than
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -35-
husband and had regular income from salary and visitation rights were
given to the father.
In Neetu B. @ Neethu Baby Mathew’s case (supra), Hon’ble Supreme
Court observed that welfare of the child is the paramount consideration
and further observed as under:-
“37. Before parting with the judgment, we find
it relevant to remind both the parents of their
primary responsibility towards child's nurturing,
which can be achieved by effective
communication and smooth execution of the
above arrangement, while exhibiting mutual
respect. The parties are advised not to let their
bitter past experience impede the child's well-
being, especially given the sensitive emotional
state of the tender child. The petitioner is advised
to encourage the child to accept and welcome
both the parents in his life for a well-rounded
development.”
12. In the present case, the child is swinging like a pendulum between the
wife and the husband because of the impugned order passed by Family
Court as the child has to stay for 5 nights and 4 days with mother and 2
nights and 3 days with father and the father is showering him with gifts
and celebrating his birthday every week as reflected from one of the
photographs referred by learned counsel for the husband and in-laws.
This fact is also not refuted by the wife that child is happy in the
company of her husband on weekends as the child associates father with
leisure and enjoyment, whereas the child associates discipline and study
with mother with whom he stays during week days when he has to attend
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -36-
school and is required to study and foster discipline. It is always difficult
for a child to part with company from the parent who provides him
leisure and enjoyment. The child would normally be happier with parent,
who pampers him rather than a parent who monitors his study and tries to
bring him up as a disciplined well behaved child. However, for a
balanced growth of child and to ensure that he turns out to be a good
human being and values importance of discipline, some gentle nudging
and strictness, at times, is also required. On the other hand excessive
pampering can turn children into brats. Therefore, this arrangement is
not for the welfare of the child, whereas, no document or evidence is
produced on record which is of such a nature that dis-entitle the wife
from keeping the custody of the child with whom the child is presently
staying. Both the parents are working in IT Sector and excelling in their
respective professional life. In such a situation, it is imperative for the
welfare of the child that child is provided an element of stability.
Therefore, we modify the impugned order of the Family Court and issue
following directions pertaining to the custody and visitation rights of
both the wife and the husband and in-laws with regard to the minor
child:-
(i) Minor child shall remain in the permanent custody of
the wife.
(ii) The husband and in-laws are allowed visitation rights
with the child for 1 day every weekend.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -37-
(iii) The husband and in-laws shall be allowed to spend
time with the child for four hours either on Saturday or
Sunday (once a week) as per the convenience of both the
parents and child.
(iv) The husband and his parents shall keep the child for
7 days during school summer vacation of the child and
those 7 days shall be mutually agreed upon by the wife
and husband.
(v) During school winter vacation of the child, the
husband and his parents shall keep the child for four days,
which shall be mutually agreed upon by the wife and
husband.
13. During the visitation rights of the husband and in-laws and summer and
winter vacation, when husband and in-laws are allowed to take the child
at their place, they shall not make any endeavour/effort to feed anything
unparliamentary and uncivilized ideas in the mind of child regarding his
mother and his maternal grandparents because feeding any violent idea or
image in the mind of the child is likely to hinder his mental and
emotional maturity. The husband and in-laws shall desist from
celebrating the birthday of the child on every weekend and shall not
handover expensive gifts to the child on each visit. However, they are at
liberty to handover him gifts on special occasions like annual birthday
and festivals.
FAO-2617-2025 (O&M) and
FAO-2558-2025 (O&M) -38-
14. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Neethu B. @ Neethu Baby Mathew’s case
cited (supra) also reminded both the parents (of the said litigation) as
follows:-
37. Before parting with the judgment, we find it relevant to
remind both the parents of their primary responsibility
towards child's nurturing, which can be achieved by
effective communication and smooth execution of the
above arrangement, while exhibiting mutual respect. The
parties are advised not to let their bitter past experience
impede the child's well-being, especially given the
sensitive emotional state of the tender child. The
petitioner is advised to encourage the child to accept and
welcome both the parents in his life for a well-rounded
development.”
15. In the present case also considering that both the wife and husband had
involved in bitter war of words with each others, we advise the parties to
the present litigation to keep in mind the above said observation/advise of
Hon’ble Supreme Court, while communicating with each other regarding
arrangement of the visitation of minor child with husband and in-laws.
16. Accordingly, both the appeals are disposed of with modification of the
order of learned trial Court to the above noted extent.
(GURVINDER SINGH GILL) (RAMESH KUMARI)
JUDGE JUDGE
26.11.2025
pooja saini
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
Legal Notes
Add a Note....