MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Custody to Father compartment mom proves her mental good being


Cr. MMO No. 228 of 2016

Decided on : 31.10.2017

Major Som Nath Palde …Petitioner
Pooja Kashyap …Respondent

Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.

Whether authorized for reporting? Yes.

For a postulant : Ms. Neelam W. Bakshi, Advocate.
For a respondent : Mr. Atul Jhingan, Advocate.

Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (oral)

The present petition is destined opposite a orders, parallel conspicuous by a schooled courts below, whereby a halt control of teenager child Adhrit, was destined to be defended by a respondent herein.
The parties contested their particular capacities to take a best fitting caring of masculine teenager Adhrit. The petitioner/complainant had contended before a schooled courts next that given a respondent being raid with a psychiatric disorder, thereupon she stood precluded to take an suitable caring of a masculine minor. However, a respondent had with her respond to a application, appended a certificate released by a doctor, wherein an echoing occurred, of hers being not raid with any psychiatric disorder, whereupon it was resolved that a mistrust of a applicant of a respondent being raid with a psychiatric commotion also hers lacking a fitting ability to take an best caring of a teenager child, hence stood effaced. However, any indictment of faith on a certificate released by a alloy concerned, with a attestation therein, of a respondent not pang any psychiatric disorder, might not, describe her to reason a suitable area parentis, given it being conjunction tendered into justification nor it being proven in suitability with law. Consequently, both a schooled courts next in imputing faith thereto, have committed a sum illegality besides an impropriety. In aftermath, a impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to a schooled Judicial Magistrate concerned, to, in suitability capacitate a respondent to infer a apposite certificate also to capacitate a petitioner/non-applicant, to cite come-back justification thereto, whereafter he shall, within 3 months, from 23.11.2017, make a pronouncement, on an focus expel underneath a supplies of Section 21 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. However, compartment a attestation is done on a aforesaid application, a respondent/applicant shall continue to keep a halt control of a teenager child. The petitioner/non-applicant shall in suitability with law, reason rights to revisit a teenager child. It is also simplified that both a contestants shall be available to cite best documentary evidence, in honour of each, hence affirmatively proof a emanate appertaining to any holding a fitting capacity, to take a best care, of a teenager child. All tentative applications also mount likely of.

See also  When court should allow amendment of plaint in suit for partition?

Records be sent behind forthwith. The parties are destined to seem before a schooled Judicial Magistrate on 23.11.2017.

Any regard done herein above shall not be taken as an countenance of opinion on a merits of a box and a hearing Court shall confirm a matter uninfluenced by any regard done herein above.

(Sureshwar Thakur) Judge

31st October, 2017

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Important SC/HC Judgements on 498A IPC
Rules and Regulations of India.


CopyRight @ MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, though No Lawyer will give we Advice like We do

Please review Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You determine afterwards Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We hoop Women Centric inequitable laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

See also  When court should allow amendment of plaint in suit for partition?
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation