1

S/L. 9.

June 15, 2018.

MNS.

C. O. No. 3618 of 2017

Sri Falguni Singha Roy
Vs.

Sri Dasarath Singha Roy and another

Mr. Subrata Roy Karmakar

…for the petitioner.

Mr. Rwitendra Banerjee,
Mr. Prasenjit Debnath,
Mr. Shibasis Chatterjee

…for the opposite party.

The father of a minor child, namely, Trishanjeet Singha Roy, has filed the present

revisional application challenging an order dated August 25, 2017, passed in a proceeding

under the Guardians and Wards Act, initiated by the petitioner for custody of the said

minor child.

By a previous order dated August 29, 2016, the trial court directed the minor child

to be produced by the opposite parties, who are the maternal grandparents of the child,

on every working Saturday at 1 P.M. in court, where the petitioner could meet his son

from 1 P.M. to 4 P.M.

Subsequently, alleging non-compliance of such order by the opposite parties, the

petitioner took out several applications to that effect. While taking up such applications,

the District Judge, Hooghly, vide Order No. 25 dated August 25, 2017, modified the

previous visitation order and directed that the petitioner should visit his minor son at the

house of the opposite parties on alternative Sundays from 5 P.M. to 6 P.M.
2

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that such modification of the earlier

visitation order was beyond the jurisdiction of the court, since only applications

complaining of non-compliance of the said earlier order were being taken up by the court.

While hearing the said matter, due to the extremely fair gesture of the learned

advocate for both sides, an agreed venue could be arrived at, since the house of the

opposite parties could be somewhat inappropriate at the present stage due to acrimony

between the parties. Visitation of a minor child in court, in any event, ought to be

deprecated keeping in mind the plight of the child in such an atmosphere.

However, due to the endeavour of learned counsel for both sides and due to a fair

approach of both parties, a venue has been agreed at for visitation of the child.

Accordingly, C. O. No. 3618 of 2017 is disposed of by modifying the impugned

order to the effect that the petitioner shall visit his minor son at the agreed venue, that is,

Strand Road, Chandannagar, Hooghly (opposite St. Joseph Convent School), on

alternative Sundays from 5 P.M. to 6 P.M., beginning from the coming Sunday, that is,

June 17, 2018.

It is made clear that such an arrangement is being made for the present and will

continue during pendency of the Act VIII Case, however, subject to further order(s) which

may in future be passed in the court below on the prayer of the parties. It is also made

clear that the merits of the matter have not been gone into and all findings made in the

present order and in the impugned order are tentative for the purpose of such visitation

and will not affect the court below at the time of trial of the Act VIII case.

There will, however, be no order as to costs.

3

Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the

parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)