counsel for the petitioner to that extent are valid. However, the learned Judge of the Family Court has referred and reproduced the said order of the learned JMFC in her order. The Learned Judge of the Family Court, after referring the said order, has taken a view that the said order cannot restrain the respondent/husband to have access to their son. The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife has also pointed out that the respondent/husband did not make any reference in his application before the learned Judge of the Family Court, rather he has suppressed this order from the learned Family Court Judge. This ought not have been done by the respondent/husband. Be that as it may, the order of adinterim injunction is passed on 16th November, 2011. It shows that the respondent/husband was injuncted from meeting his child and keeping any communication from 16th November, 2011. The said matter was fixed for arguments on 22th November, 2011 and I am informed on query that the said matter is still pending before the JMFC, Nashik at the same stage and there is no progress in the matter. Considering the stage of said proceedings and as the application for access is filed before the Family Court, for such a long time a child shall not be denied access to his father, therefore, in the interest of child, the order passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court of giving access on 1st and 3rd Saturday in the Court premises from 3 p.m. to 6 p.m. is judicious and right. Hence, this Court is not inclined to set aside the said order.
