Karnataka High Court
Ram Nithin Baalay vs Megha Bordoloi on 1 July, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:23276
WP No. 17817 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 17817 OF 2025 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
RAM NITHIN BAALAY
S/O LATE MR. BHOOMA RAJAM
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
RESIDING AT 1-8-700/21
PADMA COLONY NALLAKUNTA
HYDERABAD -500 044
...PETITIONER
(BY MS.DEEPA J., ADVOCATE)
AND:
MEGHA BORDOLOI
D/O MRIDUL KUMAR BORDOLOI
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
1904, PRESTIGE KEW GARDENS
YEMALUR MAINROAD, YEMALUR
Digitally signed BENGALURU -560 037
by MEGHA ...RESPONDENT
MOHAN (BY MS.AHALEKYA V., ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
KARNATAKA CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER
DATED 21.04.2025 PASSED ON IA NO. 22 PASSED BY THE II ADDL.
PRL. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT BENGALURU IN G AND WC 3/2022
(ANNEXURE -A).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:23276
WP No. 17817 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.22 in G & WC. No.3/2022 dated 21.04.2025 by the II Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, whereby the Family Court had dismissed the I.A. filed by the father seeking overnight custody, the petitioner/father is before this Court.
2. The parties are referred to as father and mother for the sake of convenience.
3. This writ petition is second round of litigation. Earlier when this matter had came before this Court in W.P.No.12734/2022, this Court had passed an order dated 18.07.2024 and the operative portion of the said order reads thus;
i. "The father shall continue to have the visitation rights on 1st, 2nd and 3rd Saturday and Sunday. On a Saturday he shall exercise visitation rights between 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. and on Sunday from 10.00 to 4.00 p.m. ii. The father shall pick up the child on time and shall drop the child on time and both the father -3- NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR and mother shall adhere to the time lines strictly.
iii. Whether the child asks or not, while the boy is with the father, at least two times during the stay the father shall see that the boy speaks with the mother.
iv. The food that the boy regularly takes, details of the same shall be shared to the mother. The Junk food which is not good for the boy shall not be given by the father and the boy should not left with the gadgets for longer time. v. Except on any function in the school and on the parent-teacher's meeting, on other occasions where parents are invited the father shall not go to school, if he wants to go to school he shall move the court and without the prior permission of the court the father shall not go to the school.
vi. In a month if there is 5th weekend, the father can visit the boy on that Saturday from 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. and on Sunday from 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. vii. As far as the overnight custody of the boy and vacations are concerned, the father is at liberty to move an appropriate application before the court.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR viii. On 20th July, 2024, Saturday the mother shall pickup the child at 6.00 pm in the evening and drop back the child on Sunday 21st July, 2024 at 2.00 p.m. If at any point of time the child is not comfortable that should be immediately brought to the notice of the mother and the child must be sent back to the mother. ix. This interim arrangement with regard to the overnight stay of the boy on 20.07.2024 is only considering the fact that the grand mother is coming to Bangalore, the court shall decide the application for overnight custody if at all filed independently, notwithstanding the fact that the order is passed by this court granting overnight custody.
x. The father has not filed reply to the objections filed by the mother and as such he is at liberty to raise his objections in an appropriate petition.
xi. After the 3rd Saturday and Sunday, on 4th Monday of the month the father can exercise visitation rights between 10.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. xii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. xiii. All the IAs., in this writ petition shall stand closed."
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. This Court had also passed a clarification order dated 04.09.2024 which reads thus;
i. "Point No.6, if there is a 5th Saturday in the month, the father can have the visitation on that Saturday from 10.00 am to 6.00 pm. On 5th Sunday the boy will be with the mother. If the last day of the month is a Saturday and the first day of the next month is Sunday, then on that day the father will exercise the visitation. ii. Point No.11, after the 3rd Saturday and Sunday the 4th Monday of the month, the father can exercise the visitation rights between 4.00 and 6.00 pm. iii. Point No.13, the father can have the video calls on every Tuesday and Thursday between 7.30 and 8.00. It is all subject to the boys cooperation. The father shall adhere to this. On this aspect the father shall not be rude either with the mother or the child.
Registry is directed to upload the corrected copy of the order."
5. After this, the father had filed the I.A. seeking overnight custody. In the earlier order, this Court had observed that on one occasion, the overnight custody was given to the father as the grandmother was coming and that aspect cannot -6- NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR be the basis for the Court to grant overnight custody and the Family Court has to independently deal with the application. Now, when an I.A. is filed by the father seeking overnight custody, the Family Court by way of the impugned order had dismissed the I.A. This Court had perused the order passed and the reasoning given by the Family Court. The Family Court simply discussed about the earlier applications that are filed and the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.12734/2022 and also discussed about the visitation given to the father. The Family Court simply observed that the Court do not find any merits in the I.A. and accordingly, dismissed the I.A.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/father submits that when this Court had given the liberty to the father to seek overnight custody, the Family Court ought to have considered the I.A. on the merits of it and ought to have passed a reasoned order. It is further submitted that in this case they have filed an I.A. seeking overnight custody and the same may be considered.
7. Learned counsel Ms. Ahalekya .V, submits that she has filed her vakalath recently and she wants to file the -7- NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR objections. Learned counsel for the respondent/wife submits that the mother is also a working lady. If the overnight custody is granted, she would not be in a position to spend time with the child. The Family Court considering all these aspects had rightly dismissed the I.A. filed by the father and there are no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Family Court.
8. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. As per the order passed by this Court on 18.07.2024, liberty was given to the father for seeking overnight custody and the Family Court has to independently deal with the application, notwithstanding the fact that this Court had already granted visitation to the father on one occasion. When such an application is filed by the father, the Family Court has to discuss the feasibility of granting the overnight custody whether it is in the interest of the minor or not, but the reasons that are given by the Court are not at all convincing and in that manner the Court cannot dismiss the application. The Family Court has to look into whether there is any requirement for granting overnight -8- NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR custody in the interest of the minor child and how the visitation is going on. All these aspects should have been discussed by the Family Court.
9. Then, coming to the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent/wife that she wants to file the objections, this Court exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India where both the parties have filed their I.As., as well as the objections to the I.As., and the impugned order is passed by the Family Court. In those circumstances, objections are not required to be filed when all the material are available before this Court. This Court will not look into any other material which is not filed before the Court and in that case no objections are required. This Court is not able to consider the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent/wife. In view of the above discussions as the Family Court had failed to consider the I.A. in its proper perspective, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following:
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:23276 WP No. 17817 of 2025 HC-KAR ORDER i. The impugned order passed in I.A.No.22 in G & WC.No.3/2022 dated 21.04.2025 by the II Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, is set aside.
ii. The Family Court is directed to consider the I.A. on the merits of it and shall pass the reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. iv. All I.As. in the writ petition shall stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18