SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Naurang Ram vs Smt. Sonu on 23 April, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR

D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 787 / 2018

Naurang Ram S/o Birbal Ram, Aged About 35 Years, By Caste
Soni, Resident of Chak 44 N.D.R. Tehsil Pilibanga District
Hanumangarh.

—-Appellant

Versus

Smt. Sonu W/o Naurang Ram D/o Krishan Lal, Aged About 30
Years, By Caste Soni, Resident of Ward No. 16, Behind Bus Stand,
Sadulshahar, District Sri Ganganagar.

—-Respondent

__

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rakesh Matoriya

For Respondent(s) :

__

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMCHANDRA SINGH JHALA

Judgment / Order

Per Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gopal Krishan Vyas
23/04/2018

This time barred misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant

Naurang Ram under Section 47 of the Guardian and Wards Act,

1890 against the judgment dated 21.12.2017 passed by the

learned Judge, Family Court, Sri Ganganagar in Civil Misc. Case

No.30/2016 by which the learned court dismissed the application

filed by the appellant under Section 25 of the Act of 1890.

As per the facts of the case, the appellant being father filed

an application under Section 25 of the Act of 1890 before the

Family Court, Sri Ganganagar for custody of his minor sons Harish

9 years and Dheeraj 8 years stating therein that marriage of
(2 of 3)
[CMA-787/2018]

appellant was solemnized with the respondent on 30.6.2004 at

Dadulshahar and from the wedlock of appellant with the

respondent, two sons Harish and Dheeraj were born and they are

residing with the respondent wife. According to the appellant the

respondent filed a complaint of domestic violence against the

appellant and his family members, which is said to be pending in

which false allegations were levelled that appellant is having 68

bighas of land in his name and respondent wife is blackmailing the

appellant and his family members so as to grab the said land in

which the parents of the respondent are also involved. So many

allegations are levelled by the appellant against the respondent for

claiming custody of his two minor sons.

The learned Family Court rejected the application on the

ground that appellant was arrested in connection with offence

under Section 304B IPC for the death of his first wife in which he

remained in custody, but ultimately acquitted from the charge and

another FIR was registered against him in which after

investigation FR was given, but the learned Family Court while

framing two issues held that due to conduct of the appellant, he is

not entitled for custody of two sons Harish and Dheeraj because

the welfare of both the sons is in residing with the mother.

Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that

the allegation under Section 304 IPC was totally false, therefore,

after trial, he was acquitted from the charge levelled against him

and in another case, FR was filed after investigation, therefore,

these two cases cannot be treated as ground to deny the custody

of two sons. The learned Family Court has committed a grave
(3 of 3)
[CMA-787/2018]

error while rejecting his application for custody because being

father, the appellant is entitled for custody of both the sons.

After hearing learned counsel for the appellant time barred

appeal, we are of the opinion that after discussing the entire

evidence and the conduct of the appellant, the application has

been rejected looking to the welfare of both the sons, therefore,

there is no question to quash the order impugned because the

order has been passed after considering entire evidence so also

considering the conduct of the appellant with regard to his

criminal activities.

In view of the above, the instant misc. appeal listed in the

defect side is hereby dismissed.

(RAMCHANDRA SINGH JHALA) J. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS) J.

cpgoyal/ps

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 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…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation