Megha Tarun Singla v. Tarun Kewalkrushna Singla

2025:BHC-AUG:13757 1 937-wp 6386-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6386 OF 2025 Megha Tarun Singla .. Petitioner

Versus

Tarun Kewalkrushna Singla .. Respondent Mr. Sushant V. Dixit, Advocate for the Petitioner. CORAM :

KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATED : 08th MAY, 2025.

P. C. :- .

Heard learned advocate for the petitioner for some time. 2.

The petitioner is the mother who is having custody of 4 and half years old child. The husband is given visitation rights to see the child every first and third Saturday for two hours. The husband now has filed an application seeking temporary custody of the child as he wants to take child for blessings of Kuldevi in the vacation in Patiyala and Himachal Pradesh. The temple of Kuldevi is in Himachal Pradesh and family of respondent resides at Patiyala. The learned Trial Judge considering above aspect has granted temporary custody of child from 05.05.2025 till 18.05.2025. It is argued that, a child is hardly four and half years of age and is staying with the mother. Except occasional

2 937-wp 6386-2025.odt visits father has not met the child for long duration. He does not know the good habits of the child. If the child is suddenly given in his custody that will have adverse effect on the psychology of the child. In all these apprehension, the order is challenged before this Court. 3.

This Court finds that, for every child company of father is equally important as of mother. A child is of four and half years old. He certainly can express his all desires and needs to his father. Father cannot be said to be a stranger who should not be allowed to take a child for fifteen days. The learned Court has also observed that, by now the child may have developed good bond with father who happens to be biological father and has passed the order. 4.

This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the discussion exercised by the learned Trial Court . 5.

During the course of argument it is pointed out that, the order is passed on 02.05.2025 directing to hand over the custody from 05.05.2025. Till today the husband has not come to take custody of the child. It is also pointed out that, in the affidavit opposing the transfer of matrimonial proceeding at Jalna the husband himself has stated that, he is suffering from ailments and he has even filed disability certificate in the said proceeding. It is also stated that, it is

3 937-wp 6386-2025.odt difficult for husband to travel from Mumbai to Jalna. This Court need not go into these aspects right now. This Court finds that, the order cannot be said to unreasonable or illegal. No interference is warranted in the writ petition. The writ petition, therefore, stands dismissed. 6.

Needless to say that, if the husband takes custody, he shall return the custody on 18.05.2025 to the petitioner- wife. ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. ) P.S.B.