Anuradha Kashyap v. Dr Sushil Kumar

$~26.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + MAT.APP.(F.C.) 57/2024 & CM APP. 9410/2024, CM APP. 9411/2024, CM APP. 9408/2024, CM APP. 9409/2024 ANURADHA KASHYAP ..... Appellant Through:

Ms Preeti Singh, Advocate.

versus DR SUSHIL KUMAR ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Raj Kumar and Mr Imran Khan, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R

% 16.02.2024 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] MAT.APP.(F.C.) 57/2024 & CM APP. 9410/2024 [Application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking interim relief] 1.

Issue notice.

2.

Mr Raj Kumar accepts notice on behalf of the respondent/ husband. 3.

With the consent of the counsels for the parties, the appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal at this stage itself. 4.

The appellant/ wife, via the instant appeal, seeks to assail the orders dated 16.12.2023 and 03.02.2024 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court-02, District East, Karkadooma Courts, Delhi. 5.

We may state, at the outset, that the record indicates that the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

appellant/wife has, somehow, one way or the other avoided adherence with the directions issued by the Family Court with regard to the production of the child so that interaction could take place between him and the respondent/husband.

5.1 It is not in dispute that the direction issued in that behalf through orders dated 20.11.2023, 29.11.2023 and 22.01.2024 were not complied with by the appellant/wife. The appellant/wife, instead of complying with the direction, filed a review application against orders dated 20.11.2023 and 29.11.2023, which was dismissed via order dated 16.12.2023. 6.

It is against this backdrop that the order dated 03.02.2024 came to be passed, when the Court directed the appellant/wife to bring the child for interaction to the Children's Room located in the Court Complex. The direction issued by the Family Court requires the appellant/ wife to bring the child to the Children's Room in the Court Complex on every first and third Saturday for interaction with the respondent/ husband between 3:00 PM to 4:00 PM.

7.

Ms Preeti Singh, counsel, who appears on behalf of the appellant/ wife says that the child is traumatized and does not wish to interact with the respondent/ husband.

8.

It is Ms Singh's assertion that the child who is about 5 years old has witnessed domestic violence and therefore, resists interaction with the respondent/ husband.

9.

On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/ husband denies the submission made by Ms Singh concerning domestic violence. 10.

While we are not particularly happy with the approach adopted by the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

appellant/wife, in the best interest of the child, we propose to vary the order passed by the learned Family Court to the extent given hereinafter, albeit, with the consent of the parties:

i.

The appellant/wife will produce the child for interaction with the respondent/husband at the clinic of Ms Rashi Juneja, Clinical Psychologist [Mob. No. 9873363853], located at E-82, Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar - IV, New Delhi, 110024, on 02.03.2024 and 16.03.2024. ii.

The interaction with the respondent/husband will be supervised by Ms Juneja in the manner deemed fit.

iii.

Counsel for the parties will touch base with the office of Ms Juneja with regard to the time when the child is to be produced. Ms Juneja will ensure that the respondent/husband is able to interact with the child for at least one (1) hour on each visit.

iv.

Ms Juneja is requested to submit a report concerning the interaction to the concerned Family Court. Endeavour will be made to submit the report on or before 23.03.2024.

v.

The appellant/wife will bear the burden of Ms Juneja's fee. 11.

The Registry of this Court will ensure that the report is collected from the Ms Juneja and is filed in the proceedings pending before the concerned Family Court.

12.

The appeal and the pending applications shall stand disposed of. 13.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J AMIT BANSAL, J FEBRUARY 16, 2024/rt Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.