(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2006 Kushab s/o. Dattatraya Kadam, Age : 33 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Kartala, Post. Bolka, .. Appellant Taluka : Kandhar, (Original District : Nanded. applicant) versus 1. Prabhakar s/o. Vithoba Chavan, Age : 48 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Halad-Wadhona, Taluka : Jalkot, District : Latur. 2. Sarsabai w/o. Prabhakar Chavan, Age : 45 years, Occupation : Household, R/o. As above. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. S.S. Pawar, Advocate, for the appellant. Respondent nos.1 and 2 served (Absent). ........................ (2) CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 6TH APRIL 2010 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. S.S. Pawar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant. 2. The father of two minor female children is in First Appeal, feeling aggrieved by the orders of the learned Additional District Judge, Udgir, rejecting the prayer for custody of the minor. 3. The inter se relations are not in controversy. The bickering between husband Kushab and his wife Parvatibai led to untimely death of Parvatibai for which the appellant faced Crime No. 59/2001 under Sections 498-A, 306, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, with his other family members. It was pointed out, minors were eye witnesses to the incident where Parvatibai ultimately succumbed and lost her life. The husband asserts, it was an accidental death. The husband is ultimately acquitted on 8th April 2005. 4. Mr. S.S. Pawar, learned Counsel appearing for the (3) appellant, submits, the acquittal of the husband indeed established his innocence and consequently his entitlement to the custody of the minors, who are now 15 years (Meena @ Pinki) and 13 years (Pooja). 5. There is no controversy, that the appellant herein being father, has a right to stake for custody of the minor children. However, the facts demonstrate, in order to obliterate of remitting maintenance to the minor children, this shortcut is discovered by the father. The second aspect in the matter, is the minors were eye witnesses in the prosecution faced by the father. Even if there is acquittal, the persecution to the child will not evaporate and vanish. The mind set of the father faced bereavement role to make the life of the minor children further miserable in a dismal. The settled position of law is, irrespective legal entitlement, it is the welfare of the minor children which has its pivotal role in adjudicating such claims. The conduct of the appellant, father, demonstrate a rebellion approach against either his wife, Parvatibai, who ultimately succumbed, and against the minor children. The observations of the court below, in the fact situation, on successive applications, cannot be said to be erroneous or require interference. (4) 6. The First Appeal sans merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/fa88