Decided on December 14,2016

Harshita Bhasin Appellant
State Of West Bengal And Ors Respondents


D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,J. - (1.) The applicant, Mukul Bhasin, was impleaded as the fifth respondent to a petition under Article 136 of the Constitution which was disposed of by this Court on 9 April 2014. The first respondent to the application was the petitioner in the Special Leave Petition. The applicant and the first respondent were married on 11 July 2007. They have two children ­ Ranvir, who was born on 24 July 2008 and Hridaan, born on 16 November 2011. The children are now eight and five years old. There is a matrimonial dispute and parties have been living separately since July 2013.
(2.) The applicant instituted a petition under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (Petition 754 of 2013) before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gautam Budh Nagar, UP, for dissolution of marriage and for custody of the children. The respondent instituted a habeas corpus petition before the Calcutta High Court to which the applicant filed an affidavit-in-opposition. An order was passed by the Calcutta High Court refusing interim custody to the respondent. The High Court, however, directed the applicant to bring the children on a fortnightly basis to Kolkata on a Sunday and to allow the respondent to meet them between 11 am and 4 pm at the residence of the respondent's advocate. This led to the Special Leave Petition by the respondent challenging the order refusing interim custody to her.
(3.) During the course of the hearing of the Special Leave Petition this Court recorded by its order dated 13 March 2014 that it had interviewed both the parties and the minor children to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement. By way of a temporary arrangement, interim custody of the children was granted to the respondent for the duration of the ensuing school vacation until the reopening of the school of the elder child, after which the children were to be restored to the father. Eventually, on 9 April 2014 the Special Leave Petition was disposed of since the order of the High Court impugned was purely an interim arrangement which did not finally determine the rights and obligations of the parties. However, the Court which is seized of the Guardianship Petition was requested to expedite its proceedings and to pass final orders, as far as possible, within three months. The interim arrangement regarding visitation rights made by the High Court was directed to continue.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.