Gujarat High Court
Nirmalaben W/O Rajeshbhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 16 March, 2021
Author: Sonia Gokani
Bench: Sonia Gokani, Gita Gopi
R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1537 of 2021
==========================================================
NIRMALABEN W/O RAJESHBHAI TAJSINGHBHAI DIDOL D/O KADVABHAI
MOTIBHAI GARASIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
CHETAN S VITHLAPARA(8893) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
M S PADALIYA(7406) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5,6
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 16/03/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, preferred by the petitioner-mother, seeking following prayers:
"(A) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions against the respondent nos. 2 and 3 for producing the petitioner's 4 year old minor son RIVAAN from the custody of respondent no.4 to 6, forthwith before this Honorable Court and issue appropriate orders with regard to handing over the custody of RIVAAN to the petitioner/mother, in the interest of justice;
(B) Your Lordships be pleased to direct respondents to produce the petitioner's 4 year old minor son RIVAAN before this Honorable Court and hand over her custody to the petitioner, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition; (C) Be pleased to dispense with filing of certified copies of FIR, affidavit in support of present petition and other Page 1 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER relevant documents at present with liberty to furnish the same along with the hard copies of complete petition as required under the rules once the normal functioning of this Honorable Court is restored, in the interest of justice and equity; (D) Your Lordships be pleased to grant such other and further relief(s), as are deemed fit, in the interest of justice."
2. It is the say of the petitioner-mother that a written complaint has given to SP, Dahod, on 11.11.2020. However, the child could not be traced out. It is, further, her say that the corpus-child is only four years old and ordinarily, the custody of the child up to 6 years of age, should, ordinarily, be with the mother.
2.1 The marriage of the petitioner with respondent No.4 was solemnized on 12.12.2014 and the child Rivan was born on 07.12.2015. However, their relations, later on, strained and the petitioner was subjected to cruelty by her in-laws. She, therefore, gave a complaint to the PSI, Mahila Police Station, Rajkot City, on 21.10.2020. However, since, no action is taken, she is before this Court.
2.2 This Court issued notice on 09.02.2021, more particularly, noticing that the Family Court has not started functioning, yet. The corpus was brought before this Court on 24.02.2021, when the following order came to be passed:
"1. The corpus is presented before us, today. He is a young boy, whose education, of course, is suffering. His mother is a teacher. It is explained as to how, he continued to be with his mother for long time and in the past few months, he has been taken away, forcibly. For us to know, the bonding between the mother and the child, it will be necessary to direct the mother to Page 2 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER meet the child at Rajkot.
2. In wake of the above, let the mother meet the child at Rajkot, on 4th March, 2021, at 11:00 a.m., in the presence of a responsible officer, at the office of the District Legal Services Authority.
3. This matter shall be taken-up for further hearing on 4TH MARCH, 2021, at 02:30 p.m..
3.1 So as to ensure that the child reaches Rajkot, on the given date and the time, PI, Dahod, shall ENSURE / ARRANGE that someone accompanies the respondent, during his journey to Rajkot, EXCLUSIVELY.
5. We acknowledge the presence of Mr. D.A. Vora, in-charge PDJ, and Mr. B.S. Somani."
2.3 Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the corpus was not taken to the District Court, Rajkot. On 04.03.2021, after talking to the learned PDJ, Rajkot, further order came to be passed by this Court, directing the corpus to be taken to the District Court, Rajkot, where, the learned PDJ made all, possible arrangements for the mother to meet the child. We also had discussed with the learned learned PDJ, the future course of action, more particularly, because, there was a considerable time-gap, after the child was taken away by the in-laws.
2.3.1 At the end of the meeting of the mother with the child, learned PDJ, Rajkot, tendered the report on 08.03.2021. It indicates the necessary arrangements were made at the Vulnerable Witness Deposition Centre, Rajkot, as the same has been created with the objective to offer comfort and solace to the minor victims. According to the learned PDJ, Rajkot, one Mr. D.H. Damor, ASI, Jalod Police Station, along with respondent No.4 brought the child-Rivaan to VWDC, Rajkot.
Page 3 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER Respondent No.4 was also accompanied by sister-in-law and brother- in-law of the petitioner.
2.3.2 Thereafter, the child was handed over to the petitioner and she was allowed to spend some time with the corpus-child at VWDC, Rajkot, itself, where, there are various kinds of toys, chocolates and biscuits etc. are kept for the children. The child, while with his mother, did inquire about the presence of his father, twice. The child, thereafter, told the mother that she would possibly beat her. On an inquiry by the petitioner, as to who had told him that, the child chose not to answer. Profitable, it would be to reproduce the relevant paragraph of the report of the learned PDJ, "The undersigned had made all necessary arrangements in the waiting room of Vulnerable Witness Deposition Centre (VWDC) at Rajkot, since the same has been created with an objective to offer comfort and solate to minor victims.
A.S.I. Mr. D.H. Damor of Jalod Police Station, District Dahod along with husband of the petitioner - Rajeshkumar Tajsingbhai Dindor and corpus 'Rivaan' had reached VWDC at Rajkot at 1:15 p.m. on 06/03/2021. The petitioner's sister- in-law Ratanben Kamleshbhai Garasiya and petitioner's brother-in-law Jorsingbhai Narsingbhai Mavi had also accompanied the petitioner's husband and the corpus at Rajkot. A.S.I. Mr.Damor along with these three persons and the corpus had reached Rajkot in Bolero Car No.GJ-20N- 5573.
The undersigned had asked the petitioner's husband to hand over the corpus to the petitioner, and had requested him to wait in another room. The petitioner was asked to spend time with the corpus inside the . waiting room which consisted of various kinds of toys, games, chocolates, biscuits, ice-cream etc., The corpus 'Rivaan' immediately bonded with the petitioner, however initially, he did inquire once or twice about the presence of his father. Thereafter, he also told his mother that she would beat her, however, the petitioner having asked the corpus as to who told him that she would beat her, the child had not replied and had Page 4 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER remained silent.
The child at the time of being brought to VWDC was somewhat repressed and subdued while being in his father's lap. The child Rivaan's happiness and joy knew no bounds upon seeing various toys, clothes and ice-cream, while he being in his mother's company. The mother, i.e. the petitioner had brought snacks and lunch far Rivaan and he did accept a small portion of the same. The mother had also brought new clothes and shoes for him, which he was extremely happy to put on.
As informed by the petitioner, the child was studying in an English Medium Nursery at Rajkot and, hence, could identify alphabets and numbers. The child also asked the undersigned to play with him, to which the undersigned had happily acceded for a while.
The petitioner mother and 'Rivaan' both appeared to be delighted and blissful in each other's company during the two hours that they spent together at VWDC, Rajkot. The child upon being asked by the petitioner mother to give her hugs and kisses gladly obliged her. Both of them talked and played together.
Thereafter at around 3:15 p.m., the undersigned had requested the petitioner to hand over the custody of 'Rivaan' to his father once again and while it was being done so, the corpus had asked his mother to accompany them and while leaving VWDC premises, the corpus joyfully told his mother that he would return the next day.
In the humble opinion of the undersigned, the child appeared to be sharp, agile and playful. He exuded innocence and warmth. It also appeared to the undersigned that, he was utmost comfortable in his mother's company and not once did he appear to be frightened or scared or terrified.
The petitioner's husband initially when arrived at VWDC, Rajkot, tried to prevail upon the undersigned as well as full time Secretary of DLSA, Mr. Haresh Jotaniya and the petitioner, however, when the custody of the child was once- again handed over to him, upon seeing the new clothes, that the child had worn, tried to justify about the child having worn untidy clothes when he was brought to VWDC, Rajkot, As per his say, since the child was hospitalized for previous Page 5 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER two days, he could not change his clothes, however, the petitioner told the undersigned that her husband who is serving with Treasury Office at Godhra had left the child at Dahod with his parents, as he was residing at Godhra.
..."
3. We also noticed, in our conversation with the petitioner-mother and respondent No.4-husband, that the petitioner is serving as a teacher and the child continued to be with her in-laws, after he was taken away by them, deceptively, as alleged
4. Be that as it may, without entering into the allegations and the counter-allegations, what we can notice is that there are litigations, pending between the parties, concerning matrimonial disputes. She also narrated the treatment, accorded to her by her in-laws and the same has resulted into the custody of the child not being handed over to her.
5. Having, thus, heard the learned Advocates on both the sides and noticing, more particularly, the report of the learned PDJ, Rajkot, it is quite apparent that the bonding of the child with his mother is not questionable. This was a matter of concern for this Court, since, the child has been with the father for some time. Being conscious of the fact that the corpus is aged only four and a half year and the custody of the child up to 6 years of age is, ordinarily, should be with the mother, we deem it appropriate to refer to the decision of the Apex Court in ' YASHITA SAHU VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.', (2020) 3 SCC 67, where, the Apex Court observed and held as under:
"17. It is well settled law by a catena of judgments that while deciding matters of custody of a child, primary and paramount consideration is welfare of the child. If welfare of the child so demands then technical objections cannot come in the Page 6 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER way. However, while deciding the welfare of the child it is not the view of one spouse alone which has to be taken into consideration. The courts should decide the issue of custody only on the basis of what is in the best interest of the child.
18. The child is the victim in custody battles. In this fight of egos and increasing acrimonious battles and litigations between two spouses, our experience shows that more often than not, the parents who otherwise love their child, present a picture as if the other spouse is a villain and he or she alone is entitled to the custody of the child. The court must therefore be very vary of what is said by each of the spouses.
19. A child, especially a child of tender years requires the love, affection, company, protection of both parents. This is not only the requirement of the child but is his/her basic human right. Just because the parents are at war with each other, does not mean that the child should be denied the care, affection, love or protection of any one of the two parents. A child is not an inanimate object which can be tossed from one parent to the other. Every separation, every reunion may have a traumatic and psychosomatic impact on the child. Therefore, it is to be ensured that the court weighs each and every circumstance very carefully before deciding how and in what manner the custody of the child should be shared between both the parents. Even if the custody is given to one parent the other parent must have sufficient visitation rights to ensure that the child keeps in touch with the other parent and does not lose social, physical and psychological contact with any one of the two parents. It is only in extreme circumstances that one parent should be denied contact with the child. Reasons must be assigned if one parent is to be denied any visitation Page 7 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER rights or contact with the child. Courts dealing with the custody matters must while deciding issues of custody clearly define the nature, manner and specifics of the visitation rights.
20. The concept of visitation rights is not fully developed in India. Most courts while granting custody to one spouse do not pass any orders granting visitation rights to the other spouse. As observed earlier, a child has a human right to have the love and affection of both the parents and courts must pass orders ensuring that the child is not totally deprived of the love, affection and company of one of her/his parents.
21. Normally, if the parents are living in the same town or area, the spouse who has not been granted custody is given visitation rights over weekends only. In case the spouses are living at a distance from each other, it may not be feasible or in the interest of the child to create impediments in the education of the child by frequent breaks and, in such cases the visitation rights must be given over long weekends, breaks, and holidays. In cases like the present one where the parents are in two different continents effort should be made to give maximum visitation rights to the parent who is denied custody.
22. In addition to 'Visitation Rights', 'Contact rights' are also important for development of the child specially in cases where both parents live in different states or countries. The concept of contact rights in the modern age would be contact by telephone, email or in fact, we feel the best system of contact, if available between the parties should be video calling. With the increasing availability of internet, video calling is now very common and courts dealing with the issue of custody of children must ensure that the parent who is denied custody of the child should be able to Page 8 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER talk to her/his child as often as possible. Unless there are special circumstances to take a different view, the parent who is denied custody of the child should have the right to talk to his/her child for 510 minutes everyday.
This will help in maintaining and improving the bond between the child and the parent who is denied custody. If that bond is maintained the child will have no difficulty in moving from one home to another during vacations or holidays. The purpose of this is, if we cannot provide one happy home with two parents to the child then let the child have the benefit of two happy homes with one parent each.
23. As far as the present case is concerned, keeping in view what we have held above, we are not going into various allegations and counter allegations made by both the spouses. However, we record the statement of the husband that he has no intention of divorcing his wife. We can only hope that the couple can either by themselves or through mediation settle their disputes which would not only be in their own interest but also in the interest of Kiyara. Having said so, since at this stage the dispute between them remains unresolved we shall list out the factors and weigh them in a proper manner to see what is best in the interest of the child:
24. Age of the child - the child is less than 3 years old. She is a girl and, therefore, there can be no manner of doubt that she probably requires her mother more than her father. This is a factor in favour of the wife."
5.1 This observations made by Court in the case of 'DIVYAKUMARI KEVALKUMAR BHATT VS. STATE OF GUJRAT & OTHERS', in Special Civil Application No. 6345 of 2020, Dated: 06.11.2020, reads Page 9 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER thus:
"1. The following order came to be passed by this Court on 03.11.2020.
"1. The petitioner by way of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has approached this Court for issuance of writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for production and the custody of the corpus child who is 8 months old.
2. The petitioner's marriage was solemnized with respondent no.3 on 10.12.2018. The child was born on 29.02.2020. According to her, respondent no.3 in a purchase of residential house had needed the monetary help which the grandfather of the petitioner had made twice. After lapse of some time, when her grandfather needed money back, disputes had started. She has also alleged of absence of healthy and cordial relationship between the spouses as also with the in-laws and as she was not allowed to go out anywhere or take with her son, who was only 5 months old when she was ill treated and she gave a complaint on 06.08.2020 with Mahila Police Station, Lunavada, Dist. Mahisagar. However, the police had not acted upon the same.
3. The application under Section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ['Cr.P.C.' for short ] was moved before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.47 of 2020 which, on some technical ground, not entertained stating that for getting the custody of the child, alternative remedy is available.
4. The applicant is before this Court Page 10 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER presently for the reason that due to pandemic due to Covid-19 virus, the Family Court is not taking up the matters of custody and it is almost impossible for the petitioner to reach to her child who is 7 months old. She has also further urged that the child is without her for the past more than three months and he is not also getting the mother's milk which otherwise in his age,he is supposed to have. It is, therefore, urged that on this ground alone, let the respondent be directed to handover the custody of the child which is taken away against her will and wish and for the best interest and welfare of the child, court's indulgence would be needed.
5. This Court, on 28.10.2020, had issued notice noticing the age of the child.
6. Today, the respondents have joined through Video Conferencing this Court where in-laws of the petitioner I.e. grand parents of the corpus presented Avyansh from home in presence of lady PI and respondent no.3 - husband of the petitioner has presented himself, who is an Advocate through Nadiad Court in presence of Learned Additional Sessions Judge Mr.S.D.Suthar. They are represented by Ms.Medha Pandya, learned advocate.
7. We could notice the corpus-
child(Avyansh) with the grandparents in healthy condition. We also could notice that petitioner mother joined from the Lunavada Court through Video Conferencing with her paternal grandfather. Extensively both the learned advocates are heard and the litigating parties are also availed an opportunity on the very issue of custody of the child to present their rival contentions. Without entering into allegations of either sides, it is quite apparent that child continued to be with the respondent No.3 - husband who resisted handing over of the custody on the ground of he being a premature baby and again, Page 11 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER due to pandemic because of Covid-19 viruses, the respondents are not desirous of sending the child to mother who is at Lunavada, ostensibly because of their concern of the child in the event of any health issue. At the same time, we could notice that mother is thoroughly agitated and fervently urges that medical facilities are also available at Lunavada and in surrounding area. It is alleged that she left home on her own, leaving the child behind, according to respondent No.3 whereas,as per the say of the petitioner herself, she was driven out when the child was only five months of age. And, almost three months have passed she is running from pillar to post to get the custody of child who is only 7 months old. Noticing extremely young age of child who simply could not be kept away from his mother, we deem it necessary to exercise writ jurisdiction to accede to the request of the Petitioner without at this stage granting the request of learned advocate Ms.Pandya to file the affidavit in reply formally as this surely is a nature of litigation where parties can be permitted luxury of long drawn pleadings and litigation only once the custody of the child is handed over to the mother. Let this happen at the earliest. It is a birth right of the child to be embraced in the warmth and protection of motherhood. His foundation of health and key nutritive diet is mother's milk. He cannot be deprived of these valuable requirements. For the better and the fullest health, growth and development of the child, ordinarily mother's custody is a must. The child has no voice of his nor means nor capability to knock the doors of justice for establishing his right of welfare. It is an axiomatic truth that both the parents, father and mother are required to look after the welfare of the minor and are treated as natural guardians and yet, rigid insistence of statutory Page 12 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER interpretation would not be welcomed for the welfare of such a young child. It is trite law that the custody of child at least till the age of five needs to be with mother. In re Mc Grath(1893, 1 Ch.143) Lindsey, L.J. Observed, "The dominant matter for the consideration of the court is the welfare of the child. But the welfare of a child is not to be measured by money only, nor by physical comfort only. The word 'welfare' must be taken in its widest sense. The moral and religious welfare of the child must be considered as well as its physical well- being. Nor can the ties of affection be disregarded."
8. Considering the fact that the petitioner - mother is residing with the grandparents and also noticing the concern of Respondent No.3 for the child, let him carry the child to the Petitioner mother and he can also ensure generating a conducive atmosphere, keeping aside all other contentious issues which make their relationship sore. Bearing in mind the disputes between the spouses, we are of the opinion that this matter requires presence of some authority which can monitor process of smooth handing over and, therefore, it is directed that the child shall be handed over to the petitioner - mother,at the earliest, at the District Court, Lunawada in presence of Learned Principal District Judge. Let the same be done on or before 06.11.2020. This Petition is scheduled on 06.11.2020 for reporting the compliance of the direction of handing over of custody of the child. Other and further directions with regard to right of visitation of father and grand parents, mediation to explore possibilities of reunion of spouses etc. will be passed on 06.11.2020. The respondent No.3 - husband shall ensure due care and responsibility in taking the Page 13 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER child to the mother - petitioner.
Matter to appear on 06.11.2020.
Office to reflect the name of Ms.Medha Pandya, learned advocate for the respondents. Ms.Pandya, learned advocate is permitted to file her Vakalatnama, on or before 06.11.2020."
2. Today the custody of the child is handed over to mother by the grandparents themselves in the presence of learned Sessions Judge, Lunavada and we could notice that it happened in a cordial atmosphere. We have also met the grandparents of corpus through the video conferencing and the petitioner and also asked her to welcome her inlaws to build a healthy relationship.
3. We have extensively heard Mr.Apurva Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms.Medha Pandya, learned advocate for the respondents.
3.1Request is being made by learned advocate Mr. Kirtidev Dave for the Respondent father of corpus regarding hearing of Miscellaneous Civil Application which has been moved seeking stay of the order dated 03.11.2020 passed by this Court. It has not come up on the board and there is no requirement for this Court to accede to such a request of staying the order noticing the very young age of the corpus and since by the time, such a request is made,as noted above,grandparents of corpus have handed over the custody of the child. Again, the father of corpus and the husband of the petitioner was already being represented by the Learned Advocate Ms. Megha Pandya Page 14 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER and therefore also, with no request coming through her even for further pleadings in this matter, no indulgence is required.
4. As we have noted in the earlier order, considering the chronological events as unfolded coupled with the prevalent Pandemic which has closed family courts for these categories of cases and extremely young age of the corpus, this court has chosen to intervene in this matter. Noticing the fact that before us the couple is also quite young, it is in the fitness of things to make attempts of Mediation between the spouses and the respondent husband of the petitioner is also an advocate, thus, we have requested Mr.Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms.Pandya, learned advocate for the respondents for such mediation proposing reunion to which both have agreed to. Let the same be attempted by the learned advocates and the parties shall cooperate. Let that be expedited.
5. Additional request is made for and on behalf of respondent husband that he be provided visitation rights every week and also the petitioner - wife may also join the petitioner respondent with the corpus for a short period for the purpose of vaccination. It is also urged that he would like to give toys, cloths and other required materials to the corpus and urged that she be requested another chance for reunion.
5.1So far as right of visitation of father and grandparents is concerned , from the side of Petitioner, she is open to the request of visitation of the husband and her in laws subject to their being respectful towards her and her family. She also has no reservations to their son receiving gifts and toys from the private Page 15 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER respondents. However, it is urged that vaccination is feasible everywhere. She ruled out any possibility of infection to the child as according to her, she as a mother would be much more cautious and careful in every such aspect.
5.2Having noticed the openness on both the sides to explore the possibility of compromise and till such sincere attempts are made to work out the same between the spouses genuinely, the visitation of the father and grandparents every fortnight during weekend is permitted. During the visitation hours for three to five hours each weekend ( Saturday and Sunday) as convenient to the corpus, parties shall be respectful to each other during such visit. The petitioner is open to receiving toys, gifts and other articles for the corpus from the respondents and both the sides are since open to the possibilities to reunion, let this be genuinely intended and not for the sake of custody of corpus. Insistence of the respondents for vaccination at Nadiad or outside Lunawada has no basis as the Government has arrangements at the remotest area according to the learned APP and moreover, Petitioner is an educated lady who is conscious of far reaching complications in the event of any lapse. She agreed to share these details with the learned advocate of the private respondents.
6. This Petition is disposed of with the above directions."
6. Not only very young age but the profession of the mother also would make it conducive to handover the custody for the growth of the child. He already was admitted at Rajkot in the Nursery, before being taken away to Dahod. Custody of the child, admittedly, is to be Page 16 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021 R/SCR.A/1537/2021 ORDER determined by the Family Court, however, during pandemic due to Covid-19 virus, as the Trial Courts were not opened physically and functioning of the Family Court had not started, such petitioner were entertained, noticing extra-ordinary circumstances and bearing in mind the interest of the minor children. We could also notice in our conversation with the child and we are of the firm opinion that the custody of the child for his welfare and holistic growth must be with the mother.
7. Resultantly, we come to the conclusion that the custody of the child-Rivaan needs to be HANDED OVER to the petitioner-mother. Let the same be DONE in the PRESENCE of the learned PDJ, Rajkot, on 20TH MARCH, 2021. This shall be done by the very police officer, i.e. Mr. D.H. Damor, ASI, Jalod Police Station, who had accompanied the child along with his father, on the earlier occasion. Once, there is a smooth transition of handing over of the custody of the child to the petitioner-mother, the same shall be REPORTED to this Court by the learned PDJ, Rajkot.
8. The matter shall be taken-up for further hearing on 25th March, 2021, when, the other and further orders, including the right of visitation etc., shall be passed.
9. Let a copy of this order be GIVEN to the learned APP for her onward communication and due compliance.
(SONIA GOKANI, J) (GITA GOPI,J) UMESH/-
Page 17 of 17 Downloaded on : Fri Mar 19 22:05:21 IST 2021