Dismissed¶63

Sri Prithvi Sunku v. Smt Sukrutha Prithvi

Karnataka HC1 Jun 2026WP/14861/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; W.P. No. 14861 of 2026 (GM-FC); decided 01.06.2026 by Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha; writ petition under Article 227 against Family Court order dated 02.05.2026 on I.A. No.XVII in G & WC No.438/2024; interim custody/visitation of minor child under Section 12 Guardians and Wards Act; interim visitation order dated 12.05.2026; POCSO complaint against father after interim custody; respondent's I.A. No.2/2026 for modification; writ petition infructuous and dismissed; proceedings on I.A. No.2/2026 closed; parties free to pursue mediation by memo/application before Family Court; Karnataka Mediation Center; no cases cited.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition has become infructuous and is liable to be dismissed; it is accordingly dismissed. ¶56

Sri Prithvi Sunku Vs Smt Sukrutha Prithvi — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶63

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 02.05.2026 passed by the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru on I.A. No.XVII in G & WC No.438/2024 (dismissing the petitioner's application for interim custody of the minor child under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act) is liable to be quashed in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶27

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition has become infructuous and is liable to be dismissed; it is accordingly dismissed.

¶56

Key takeaways

If both parties are willing to resolve their disputes amicably, they may opt for any mode of amicable resolution, including mediation, by making a submission or by filing a memo or appropriate application before the concerned Family Court.obiter¶59

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha, single Judge) dismissed as infructuous a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the order dated 02.05.2026 passed by the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru on I.A. No.XVII in G & WC No.438/2024, by which the father's application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act for interim custody of the minor child, Kumari Srimayi Prithvi Sunku, during the summer vacation (Sundays and Mondays, 10.00 a.m. to 05.00 p.m., April-May 2026) had been rejected. By interim order dated 12.05.2026 the Court had granted visitation on specified Saturdays and Sundays (16, 17, 23, 24, 30 and 31.05.2026) and directed the parties to appear before the Karnataka Mediation Center, Bengaluru on 06.06.2026. After interim custody on 16.05.2026 and 17.05.2026, a complaint was lodged against the petitioner/father and others under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and a case was registered; the respondent then filed I.A No.2/2026 for modification of the interim order. Both sides conceded the petition had become infructuous; the Court dismissed it and closed proceedings on I.A No.2/2026, observing that the parties remain free to opt for amicable resolution, including mediation, by filing a memo or appropriate application before the concerned Family Court.

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:25409 WP No. 14861 of 2026

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO. 14861 OF 2026 (GM-FC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. PRITHVI SUNKU S/O KIRAN SUNKU,

¶9

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.14, RAMIYENGAR ROAD, V.V. PURAM, BENGALURU SOUTH,

¶10

BENGALURU - 560 004.

¶11

Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. RANGANATH REDDY R, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

SMT. SUKRUTHA PRITHVI

¶16

W/O PRITHVI SUNKU,

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:25409 WP No. 14861 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,

¶20

R/AT NO.61/62, EAST PARK ROAD,

¶21

5TH CROSS, NEAR MLA COLLEGE,

¶22

MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

¶23

…RESPONDENT

¶24

(BY SRI. NAGESH, ADVOCATE FOR

¶25

SMT. DHANALAKSHMI Y, ADVOCATE)

¶26

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE

¶27

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD. 02.05.2026 PASSED ON I.A.NO. 17 IN G AND WC NO. 438/2024 ANNEX-A BY THE LEARNED IV ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BENGALURU AND ETC.,

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS

¶29

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶31

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:25409 WP No. 14861 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

Heard Sri.Ranganath Reddy.R learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.Nagesh who represents Ms.Dhanalakshmi.Y learned counsel on record for the respondent.

¶35

This writ petition is filed seeking the Court to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ and to quash the order that is passed by the Court of IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore on I.A. No.XVII in G & WC No.438/2024 dated 02.05.2026 and consequently to allow the said interlocutory application.

¶36

Petitioner herein filed I.A No.XVII invoking Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, seeking a direction to the respondent to hand over the interim custody of the minor child Kumari Srimayi Prithvi Sunku to him on every Sunday and Monday from 10.00 a.m. to 05.00 p.m., during the months of April 2026 and May 2026 that is during the summer vacation of the child. Family Court

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:25409 WP No. 14861 of 2026

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

dismissed the said interlocutory application and aggrieved by the same, petitioner approached this Court.

¶41

On 12.05.2026 this Court passed orders on I.A No.1/2026. The operative portion of the order reads as under:-

¶42

"Under the following interim arrangement, the petitioner shall be entitled to visitation rights during 10.00 a.m. to 05.00 p.m. on following dates:

¶43

16.05.2026, 17.05.2026, 23.05.2026,

¶44

24.05.2026. 30.05.2026 and 31.05.2026.

¶45

The petitioner, who is residing in V.V. Puram, at the address shown in the cause title, shall pick up the minor child from the residence of the respondent, who is residing at Malleshwaram at 10.00 a.m., every Saturday and Sunday on the aforesaid dates and shall drop the child back at the residence of the respondent at 5.00 p.m., as stated supra .

¶46

The petitioner shall take good and proper care of the child and shall ensure that no harm, inconvenience or hardship is caused to the minor child during the period of visitation.

¶47

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:25409 WP No. 14861 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

List the petition after Summer Vacation. Meanwhile, the parties are directed to appear before the Karnataka Mediation Center, Bengaluru on 06.06.2026.

¶50

Hand delivery of this order is permitted".

¶51

On this day, learned counsel who represents the respondent submits that as directed by this Court, interim custody of the child was given to the petitioner on 16.05.2026 and 17.05.2026. However, basing on the difficulty expressed by the child after such interim custody by the petitioner, a complaint was given to the police against the petitioner/father and others under the Provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and a case was registered by police basing on the said complaint. Learned counsel states that respondent therefore filed I.A No.2/2026 for modification of the order dated 12.05.2026. Learned counsel states that in fact the writ petition itself has become infructuous.

¶52

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:25409 WP No. 14861 of 2026

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

Learned counsel for the petitioner endorses the submission of learned counsel for the respondent that the writ petition has become infructuous. However, learned counsel states that mediation process is pending and hence same may be taken into consideration though the writ petition has become infructuous.

¶55

In reply to the said submission, learned counsel who represents the respondent states that in the light of registration of criminal case against the petitioner basing on the complaint given, there is no question of amicable settlement of issues between the parties.

¶56

On hearing the submission made by both the learned counsel and perceiving the fact that the writ petition itself has become infructuous, this Court is of the view that writ petition is liable to be dismissed. So far as mediation is concerned, in case both the parties are willing to resolve their disputes amicably, they can opt for any modes of amicable resolution including mediation by

¶57