MOHINDER PAL, J. - (1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 28.8.2009 passed by the learned Guardian Judge (Exercising the Powers of District Judge), Jind, whereby the petition filed by appellant Krishan under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 read with Section 6 of Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, for custody of the minor girl child Pooja, who was born on 20.8.2000 out of the wedlock between the appellant and respondent, was dismissed.
(2.) I have heard Mr. Jai Bhagwan Sharma, Advocate, appearing for the appellant and Mr. Harish Nain, Advocate, appearing for the respondent and have perused the impugned judgment. Presently, the custody of baby Pooja is with her mother Anita alias Neeta (respondent). On a petition filed by the respondent for divorce, she was granted ex parte divorce. Proceedings initiated by the appellant for setting aside the ex parte decree of divorce are stated to be pending before the trial Court. It is admitted position that the appellant and his brothers are facing criminal trial under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jind, on the allegations of cruelty etc. conducted by them upon the respondent. Appellant has also been saddled with the order of maintenance to the extent of Rs. 800/- per month i.e Rs. 500/- per month for the respondent and Rs. 300/- per month for the minor daughter in proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure initiated by the respondent. The minor daughter Pooja is residing with the respondent since May, 2003 at the house of the father of the respondent. There is no evidence on record that the appellant ever tried to rehabilitate the respondent by convening any Panchayat or by involving respectables of both the families. Also, the appellant has not been able to lead any evidence that the minor is not being kept properly by the respondent. The Jamabandi (Exhibit P.2), which was adduced in evidence by the appellant, shows that he (appellant) is owner in possession of approximately 2 acres of land. The appellant had mortgaged major portion of the said land for a consideration of Rs. 2,00,000/- vide Rapat No.26 dated 31.12.2008. Therefore, the financial position of the appellant cannot, by any stretch of reasoning, be said to be sound. The age of baby Pooja is now more than ten years and five months, she having born on 20.8.2000. She is studying in a school at Village Laun in Class IV, as is evident from her school certificate Exhibit D.X. The learned Guardian Judge has mentioned in the impugned judgment that he had interviewed baby Pooja in his Chamber and she expressed her desire to stay with her mother if the reunion of her parents was not possible. The Guardian Judge observed that baby Pooja is an intelligent and sensible girl, who is alive of the matrimonial turmoil of her parents. Practically speaking, minor girls need their mother to understand girly things. It is well-said that a mother always has to think twice, once for herself and once for her child. The tie which links mother and child is of such pure and immaculate strength as to never weaken. Home for a little girl is that where her mother lives. A mother's live for her child is like nothing else in the world. For a little girl, mother is always there to support her whenever she needs her.
(3.) TAKING into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the paramount consideration with regard to the custody of the minor daughter is her welfare, it is in the best interest of the minor child that her custody is allowed to remain with her mother.;