Disposed

Prajitha v. Suvesh

Kerala HC2 Sept 2021OP (FC)/373/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to interfere with the Family Court's interim custody order favoring the father, citing sexual abuse allegations against the mother's relative. However, the Court allowed the mother contact rights via WhatsApp and supervised visits at the Family Court.

What did the court decide?

Mother granted contact rights via WhatsApp daily and supervised visits at Family Court premises on Saturdays.

Prajitha Vs Suvesh — Child Custody and Guardianship | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH THURSDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 11TH BHADRA, 1943 OP (FC) NO. 373 OF 2021

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.2.2021 IN IA 4/2020 IN IA 1/2020 IN OP 459/2020 OF FAMILY COURT, TIRUR

¶7

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶8

PRAJITHA, AGED 32 YEARS D/O PRAKASHAN THECHERIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VADAKKE ANNARA, THRIKANDIYOOR AMSOM, ANNARA DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 101.

¶9

BY ADVS.P.VENUGOPAL T.J.MARIA GORETTI FERHA AZEEZ

¶10

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶11

SUVESH, AGED 33 YEARS S/O VELAYUDHAN K.P, KIZHAKKEETTU VALAPPIL HOUSE, EDAPPAL AMSOM, PERUMPADAPPU DESOM, PERUMPADAPPU P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-679 576.

¶12

BY ADVS. JAMSHEED HAFIZ K.K.NESNA

¶13

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

O.P.(FC).No.373/2021

¶15

-:2:-

¶16

Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2021

¶17

A.Muhamed Mustaque,J.

¶18

The dispute is between the father and mother in regard to the

¶19

interim custody of the minor child. The father filed OP No.459/2020 for custody before the Family Court, Tirur. On the basis of the consensus

¶20

arrived at between the parties in the counselling session, the father is

¶21

entitled for custody of the child from 9 a.m on every Saturday till 5 p.m on

¶22

succeeding Sunday. This arrangement was worked out for sometime. Thereafter, a complaint was registered at the instance of the father stating

¶23

that the child was sexually abused by the relative of the mother. A criminal

¶24

case was registered by the police. Pointing out these facts, father filed an

¶25

application for interim custody. The Family Court, noting the subsequent

¶26

events including the medical evidence and statement recorded under

¶27

O.P.(FC).No.373/2021

¶28

-:3:-

¶29

Section 164 Cr.P.C, came to the conclusion that the custody of the child

¶30

shall remain with the father until further orders. This order is impugned in

¶31

the original petition filed by the mother.

¶32

We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶33

respondent.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the child is

¶35

only 5½ years old and is a girl child. It is submitted that the incident as

¶36

referred to in the crime is cooked up by the respondent/father to have

¶37

custody of the child permanently. It is further submitted that the mother will take care of the child and protect her well being and she will remain

¶38

all along with her to protect her.

¶39

We have gone through the order. The mother is divested with

¶40

custody of the child for the reason that a crime has been registered against

¶41

her near relative alleging sexual abuse of the child. The Family Court in

¶42

O.P.(FC).No.373/2021

¶43

-:4:-

¶44

fact passed such an order to protect the interest of the child. We may not be

¶45

justified in interfering with the reasoned order invoking our power under

¶46

Article 227 of the Constitution of India. At the same time, we are of the

¶47

view that mother should not be deprived of contact rights. The

¶48

father/respondent shall allow the mother to contact the child on every day

¶49

between 7.00 p.m and 7.30 p.m. through WhatsApp and also on every

¶50

Saturday, the mother shall be allowed to interact with the child from 10

¶51

a.m till 4.00 p.m. in the Family Court premises. The mother is also given

¶52

liberty to move the Family Court to vary this order for any cogent reasons.

¶53

The original petition is disposed of with the above modification.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶56

JUDGE

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

kp True copy

P.A. to Judge

O.P.(FC).No.373/2021

-:5:-

APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 373/2021

¶65

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶66

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY 459/2020 O COURT, TIR	OF THE PETITION IN OP NO N THE FILES OF THE FAMILY UR
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY PASSED BY NO 1/2020	OF THE ORDER DATED 8.12.2020 THE FAMILY COURT, TIRUR IN IA IN OP NO 459/2020
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY PASSED BY 2/2020 IN	OF THE ORDER DATED 21.12.2020 THE FAMILY COURT IN IA NO OP NO 459/2020
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY RESPONDENT 459/2020	OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE AS IA NO NO 4/2020 IN OP NO
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY BY THE PET NO 459/202	OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED ITIONER IN IA NO 4/2020 IN OP 0
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY PASSED BY (OPFC) NO	OF THE ORDER DATED 12.1.2021 THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN 2/2021
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY PASSED BY NO 4/2020	OF THE ORDER DATED 11.2.2021 THE FAMILY COURT, TIRUR IN IA IN OP NO 459/2020

Prajitha v. Suvesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prajitha v. Suvesh

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

Vineetha.v. Vs K.Anil

Manu Cheriyan Vs Philomina Decitha Edwin

Anilkumar Kurup, Vs Suma Anil

Jith K.M Vs Sandeepa T.A

Arun Cleetus Vs Nimisha Thomas

Yyyyy Vs Xxxx