High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/4598/2026disposed of

Abhinav Jindal v. Navanshee

2026-05-29Mr. Justice Yashvir Singh Rathor2 pages

CR-4598-2026 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CR-4598-2026 Date of decision: 29.05.2026 ABHINAV JINDAL .....Petitioner

VERSUS

NAVANSHEE ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR Present :

Mr. Kshitiz Goel, Advocate, Mr. Krishan Kanha, Advocate and Mr. Abhinav Jindal, (petitioner in person, appeared through V.C.).

**** YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR , J. (Oral) 1.

The present revision petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed for setting aside the order dated 16.05.2026 (Annexure P-12), whereby the application of the petitionerfather (Annexure P-10) for physical access and permission to take child to his parental home for two weeks during summer vacations has been dismissed.

I have heard the petitioner and have gone through the material on record.

PRIYANKA THAKUR 2026.05.29 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CR-4598-2026 -23.

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner had moved an application seeking physical access and permission to take child to his parental home for two weeks during summer vacations. However, the same has been rejected by the learned Family Court on the ground that similar application moved by petitioner last year was stayed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while taking into consideration the welfare of the child and now the petitioner is not entitled to the same relief. However, it is not in dispute that the order granting physical access during summer vacations was stayed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.05.2025 (Annexure P-7) but subsequently, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn and the same has not been decided on merits.

Resultantly, impugned order dated 16.05.2026 (Annexure P-12) is set aside and the Family Court is requested to decide the application moved by the petitioner in light of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2025 INSC 709, 'EBY Cherian Vs. Jerema John' while taking into consideration the welfare of the minor child, so that such applications are not moved again and again in future. 5.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

(YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR) JUDGE 29.05.2026 Priyanka Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRIYANKA THAKUR 2026.05.29 18:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document