Disposed

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar v. Mrs. Divya K C.

Karnataka HC12 Jul 2024WP/2819/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Father sought modification of a Family Court interim order granting only supervised visitation with his two young children, citing his cancer diagnosis and allegations about the wife's brother. The High Court interacted with the family and modified the visitation regime: overnight weekend visits for the boy and day visits for the girl, conditioned on monthly maintenance payment.

What did the court decide?

I.A.No.5 order modified to grant father expanded visitation (overnight Saturday-Sunday for boy, Saturday daytime for girl); writ petition disposed.

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar Vs Mrs. Divya K C. — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 2819 OF 2024 (GM-FC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. KARAN CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O. A. CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A. UNIT K5, NO.480, 13TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 034.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. AZHARALI FAROOQI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

MRS. DIVYA K.C., W/O. KARAN CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/A NO.161, 6TH CROSS, IST MAIN, S.T. BED LAYOUT, IST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 034.

¶14

…RESPONDENT (BY SMT. S.K. PRATHIMA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTION MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 05.01.2024 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE HONBLE V ADDL. PRINCIPAL FAMILY COURT JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU IN G AND WC NO.137/2023 ON IA.NO.5 AND DIRECT THAT TEMPORARY CUSTODY OF THE MINOR CHILDREN KAVIN AGED 4 AND 10

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶18

MONTHS AND AANYA AGED 1 YEAR 10 MONTHS BE HANDED OVER TO THE PETITIONER PRODUCED HEREIN AS ANNX-A AND ETC.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the modification of the order in I.A.No.5 in G & WC.No.127/2023 dated 05.01.2024 passed by the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore to direct the temporary custody of the minor children by name Kavin aged 4 years 10 months and Aanya aged 1 year 10 months be handed over to the petitioner/father. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.

¶22

The Court below by order dated 05.01.2024 had granted the visitation rights to meet the children in Visitation rooms, BMC on every Thursday between 3.00 pm. to 5.00 pm., and the father is directed to take care of the needs of the children and also directed not to give any objectionable food/ snacks/beverages to the children during the visitation. Further,

¶23

the father was directed not to give any ill-advise against respondent/mother and also the mother was directed not to

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶25

take the children from out of the jurisdiction of the Court till disposal of the petition.

¶26

It is the case of the petitioner/father that parties were married on 29.05.2014 and thereafter the same was registered at the office of the Sub-Registrar. Out of the wedlock they are blessed with two children. In view of the disputes between the parties, the wife along with two children had left the husband and went to her parents place. It is the case of the father that the brother of respondent/wife is an accused and charge sheeted for the offences under the POCSO Act. The petitioner is diagnosed with the Cancerous Tumour for that he had to undergo surgeries, at that point of time, the wife had left along with the children. Thereafter, he had given a police complaint that his minor children were illegally taken and also filed a petition for seeking custody in G & WC.No.137/2023 and also filed I.A.No.5 for temporary custody and I.A.No.7 for visitation rights and I.A.No.8 seeking a direction that the children should not be taken outside the jurisdiction of the Court. Earlier, the petitioner was also filed the Habeas Corpus petition that is W.P.H.C.No.57/2023 for handing over the minor children, but

¶27

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶28

the same was dismissed by relegating the parties to the Family Court. It is stated that second charge sheet was filed against the brother as he has not appeared before the Court. It is his complaint that the wife is staying in the same house where he is residing and it is his further grievance that the Trial Court has not granted interim custody.

¶29

The wife had filed her objections taking several grounds and it her case that the brother is not staying with her and he is staying in a different house. This Court had heard this matter on several occasions and interacted with the grandparents, mother and the children. On 04.03.2024, considering the contention advanced on behalf of both the parties, had directed the parties to appear before this Court. Then, in the order dated 13.03.2024, it is observed that while this case is pending a complaint was given on 28.02.2024 to the Deputy Commissioner, wherein it is mentioned that on 18.03.2024, when he went to visit his minor children on the visitation day, his children felt happy to see him and about 5.15 pm., when the visitation rights coming to an end, the elder child started crying and he refused to go back with the

¶30

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶31

mother and the mother and her family members forcibly snatched and taken away the son. According to him such behaviour is quite unusual and needs immediate attention in the form of protection. To that complaint, on 12.03.2024 and on 13.03.2024, the wife was called to the police station. Then, this Court in the said order had observed that anything that has transpired during the visitation rights, it is the duty of the husband to bring it to the notice of the Court and he cannot keep on filing the complaint and also seek the visitation rights. Though, this Court was not happy in the manner in which the complaint is given and the wife is made to go the police station and as this Court is also conscious about the welfare of the children, they need to have the love and affection of both the parents, this Court on 23^rd and 30^th March, 2024 had permitted the father to exercise the visitation rights and directed the mother to take both the children to the Bangalore Club and also made it clear that the husband should be very cautious and shall not repeat these kinds of things. When the matter came up on 02.04.2021 as the son’s birthday was on 11^th April, 2024, the Court had permitted the father to meet his children. Then, later by order dated 18.04.2024, this Court permitted the

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶34

father, grandparents and the sister to exercise their visitation rights on Saturday that is on 24.04.2024 between 10.30 am. and 1.30 pm. Thereafter, in continuation of the same, on 25.04.2024, the father was directed to pay an amount of *Rs.7,50,000/- as the arrears of maintenance as determined by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Then, by order dated 06.06.2024 the visitation was permitted at the grandparent’s place on 08.06.2024, 09.06.2024, 15.06.2024 and 16.06.2024, in the presence of a third party. Thereafter, it was extended till 19.06.2024. Then, when the matter came up on 05.07.2024, it is brought to the notice of the Court that the husband had made certain defamatory comments on the wife in the Bangalore Club and considering the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Court had asked the wife to file an affidavit in that regard and if any objections, the husband is at liberty to file his objections.

¶35

This Court had perused the third party observers report who was present on the visitation day as per the order of this Court it is stated that the boy was good during the visitation times and was enjoying. Objections are filed by the petitioner

¶36

*Corrected vide court order dated: 23.07.2024.

¶37

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶38

wherein all the allegations that are made by the mother were denied and also arguments were advanced with regard to the brother of the wife that he is still staying and it is stated that the photographs which shows that the brother of the wife is still staying in the same house. He had relied on the judgment of Kerala High Court in case of Muhammed Ashraf Cheerangan Vs. Dr. Fathimabi¹ . The aspect of brother staying along with the wife had come up before this Court. Initially, when it fall for consideration at that point of time, an affidavit is filed by the wife stating that he is not residing with them and he is residing separately. Now, it is the contention of the husband that the brother in law is staying along with the wife. All those issues this Court is not inclined to go into as those issues cannot be decided before this Court. It is always open to the husband to adduce evidence in that regard before the Court below.

¶39

Then, coming to the visitation rights, this Court while interacting with the grandparents, the boy, the girl and also the mother, observed that the boy has lot of affection and bonding with the grandparents. Both mother and father has lot of issues

¶40

1 OP (FC) No.254/2015 (R), dated:18.08.2015

¶41

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶42

and allegations against each other. This Court had observed that husband is very aggressive in nature. This Court had also cautioned him not to behave in such manner. When this Court is deciding the issues pertaining to the children, the Court would look at only the welfare of the child. This Court is not dwelling into any of the affairs that are pertaining to the wife and the husband.

¶43

This Court had passed several orders keeping the welfare of the minors in mind. This Court had looked into several aspects, has given considerable time to the parties and also interacted with the parties. The main G & WC., is pending before the Court. Considering the fact that how the visitation has went on several occasions and keeping in view the interest of the minor, this Court is passing the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

i. The grandparents and the father can exercise the visitation right at their place. On every Saturday,

¶46

the father can pick up the boy from the mother's place by 10:00 a.m. and the boy can stay overnight and on Sunday by 10:00 a.m., the father shall drop

¶47

the boy at the mother's place.

¶48

Page nos. 8 and 9 retyped and replaced vide court order dated: 23.07.2024.

¶49

¶50

NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶51

ii. The petitioner/father and mother shall adhere to the timeline and shall not create any kind of inconvenience to the other spouse.

¶52

iii. As far as the girl child is concerned, as she is too small, on Saturday, the father can pick up the girl from the mother's place at 10:00 a.m and drop her by 2:00 p.m. If the girl is comfortable, the father can retain her till 2:00 p.m and if she is not comfortable, even before the scheduled time, the girl shall be sent home.

¶53

iv. The issue with regard to the brother-in-law staying along with the wife and the children that aspect it is open to the parties to agitate before the Trial Court.

¶54

v. Even in case of boy also whenever he wants to go to the mother that request of the boy should be considered and he should be sent back.

¶55

vi. As per the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court Rs.1,25,000/- is to be paid as maintenance. The father shall continue to pay the same till further orders are passed in the Domestic Violence case

¶56

Page nos. 8 and 9 retyped and replaced vide court order dated: 23.07.2024.

¶57

10 -

¶58

NC: 2024:KHC:27388 WP No. 2819 of 2024

¶59

and if any amount is not paid, the mother is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings.

¶60

vii. Till further orders are passed in the Domestic Violence case, by 5^th of every month if the maintenance amount is not paid to the wife, this order passed by the Court with regard to the visitation rights for that month the petitioner and family cannot exercise.

¶61

viii. The order in I.A.No.5 in G & WC.No.127/2023 dated 05.01.2024 passed by the V Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore is modified.

¶62

ix. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of .

¶63

x. All I.As. in the writ petition, if any, shall stand closed.

¶64

SD/JUDGE

¶65

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8

¶66

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar v. Mrs. Divya K C.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Karan Chandrashekar v. Mrs. Divya K C.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Shivaraju C Vs Smt Nagarathna

Mr Pascal Mazurier Vs Mrs Suja Jones Mazurier

Sri Jangama Samsthana Mutt Vs Smt Kasturi

Sri J K Munivenkataramanappa Vs Smt Padmavathamma

Mrs Valsa Verghese Chacko Vs Smt Muniyamma

Mr. G. Ganesh Vs Smt. R Jayashree