Partly allowed

Smt R Archana v. M G Vijaya Kumar

Karnataka HC9 Feb 2026WP/31020/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed seeking quashing of a Family Court order granting the respondent father interim custody and liberty to visit the petitioner's house. The High Court set aside the liberty to visit the petitioner's house but confirmed the direction to hand over the child at court hearings.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to visit petitioner's house set aside; direction to hand over child at court hearings confirmed.

Smt R Archana Vs M G Vijaya Kumar — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:7610 WP No. 31020 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA WRIT PETITION NO.31020 OF 2025 (GM-FC)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. R. ARCHANA, W/O VIJAYA KUMAR, D/O RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O ARALAKUNTE VILLAGE, YELDUR HOBLI, SRINIVASPURA-TQ,

¶9

NOW AT FLAT NO-14, SRIRAM BRUNDAVANA, VENKATESWARA LAYOUT Digitally signed by AASEEFA BEHIND RUPESH HOTEL, PARVEEN Location: HIGH BOMMASANDRA JIGANI LINK ROAD, COURT OF KARNATAKA BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, BENGALURU-560099. (BY SRI. HALLI SHANTAPPA BASAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:7610 WP No. 31020 of 2025

¶12

HC-KAR

¶13

AND:

¶14

M G VIJAYA KUMAR, S/O YELEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 34 YAERS, R/O MATNAHALLI VILLAGE, SUGUTUR HOBLI-563101, KOLAR-TQ AND DISTRICT,

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. RAHUL S. REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

¶18

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD 07.08.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT AT KOLAR, IN G AND W.C NO.1/2025 ON IA NO.4/2025 PRODUCED ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B- GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶21

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:7610 WP No. 31020 of 2025

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Heard Sri.Halli Shantappa Basappa, learned counsel for petitioner as well as Sri.Rahul S. Reddy, learned counsel for respondent.

¶26

Seeking the Court to quash the order that is rendered by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Kolar, on I.A.No.IV in G&WC No.1/2025 dated 07.08.2025 this writ petition is filed.

¶27

Respondent herein filed a petition seeking interim custody of the child by name Master Charvi Gowda V. to celebrate Varamahalakshmi festival scheduled on 08.08.2025 and also on every Friday from 10.00 a.m. to 05.00 p.m., pending disposal of the main petition.

¶28

The Family Court through the impugned order granted liberty to the respondent/father to visit the house of petitioner/wife and to spend time with the child and to give any presentation if he wish. Petitioner/wife was

¶29

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:7610 WP No. 31020 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

directed to treat respondent/husband with all respect and dignity during his visit and to hand over the custody of the child between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. Petitioner/wife was also directed to bring the child on all dates of hearing to the Court and hand over the custody of the child to the respondent/husband between 12.00 p.m. and 2.00 p.m.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the girl is aged around three years six months as of now. As per the provisions of Guardians and Wards Act, the custody of the child should be with the mother and therefore respondent/father should not ask for either final custody or interim custody, whatever it may be, but the Court granted custody of the child which is improper. Learned counsel also states that during the visit of respondent/ father to the house of the petitioner/mother, he created all kind of galata and nuisance, due to which petitioner/wife gave complaint to police.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2026:KHC:7610 WP No. 31020 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

On the other hand, land counsel for respondent submits that respondent/father is willing to visit the child at any place as directed by the petitioner/wife.

¶37

So far as liberty given to the respondent to visit petitioner's house is concerned, this Court is of the view that as both the parties are under longer heads, for their interest and for the best interest of the child, the impugned order is required to be set aside to that extent. However, so far as handing over the child by the petitioner to the respondent on the dates of hearing his concerned, this Court is of the view that even father is required to develop bondage with the child and thus visitation between 12.00 p.m. and 2.00 p.m. that too in the Court premises will not in any way cause harm to either the petitioner or to the minor child. Therefore, this Court considers desirable to dispose of the writ petition accordingly.

¶38

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC:7610 WP No. 31020 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

8. The petition is disposed of with the following

¶42

ORDER

¶43

i) Liberty granted to the respondent/father to visit

¶44

the house of petitioner/mother through the impugned order is set aside.

¶45

ii) So far as direction given to the petitioner/mother to bring the child on all dates of hearing to the Court and to hand over the child to the custody of the respondent/father between 12.00 p.m. and 2.00 p.m. is concerned, there requires no interference and thereby the impugned order to that extent is confirmed.

¶46

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶47

AP CT:TSM, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53

Smt R Archana v. M G Vijaya Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt R Archana v. M G Vijaya Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Sathish Shetty Vs Mrs. Sheebha Shetty

Madhu Vs Pallavi

Sathyanarayana Manohar Vs Smt Suman S

Mr Vivek George Jacob Vs Mrs Elizabeth George

Sri Jayanth L Vs Smt Shilpa v

Ravi S Vs Prathima R