C.R.No.7048/2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.R.No.7048/2008 Date of order : 23.1.2009 Manjit Kaur and another ......Petitioner(s) Versus Inderjit Singh and another ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mrs. Naveen Malik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. R.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the respondents. JASWANT SINGH,J(ORAL) Petitioners, who are maternal grand-parents of a 14 months old girl- Kach Kaur Brar, have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying for setting aside order dated 5.12.2008 (Annexure P.1) passed by Civil Judge(Senior Division), Muktsar whereby their application seeking interim custody of the minor Kach Kaur Brar, during the pendency of their petition under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act (for short “the Act”)1890, has been dismissed. Briefly, the facts alleged, are that the daughter of the petitioners namely Amandeep Kaur was married to respondent No.1 Inderjit Singh and a female child-Kach Kaur Brar was born on 20.11.2007. Amandeep Kaur, the unfortunate daughter, died on 10.6.2008 and a case bearing FIR No.88 dated 10.6.2008 under Sections 304-B/34 IPC was registered at P.S Sadar, Muktsar against Inderjit Singh-respondent No.1 (husband), mother-in-law, sister-in-law and husband of sister-in-law. It is further stated that the husband-respondent No.1 and paternal grand-mother are in judicial custody. C.R.No.7048/2008 2 It is alleged that unfortunate daughter Amandeep Kaur was harassed and murdered in a gruesome manner for the greed of dowry. No allegation against respondent No.2-Chamkaur Singh, paternal grand-father of the minor child has been made. It is, he, who is maintaining the minor. Petitioners being the maternal grand-parents of the child moved an application under Sections 8 & 10 of the Act and under Section 13 of the Hindu Minor and Guardianship Act seeking custody of the child. Along with the same, an application under Section 12 of the Act seeking interim custody of the minor was also filed. Upon notice, respondents appeared and filed a reply to the main petition. On hearing the counsel for the parties, the present application was decided and the prayer for interim custody was declined. Learned trial Court has noticed that without any direction from it, respondents had produced the minor in the Court and the petitioner- maternal grandparents met the minor. Learned trial Court found that there was nothing to show that the minor was not properly looked after. Learned trial Court also relied upon the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as R.V.Srinath Prasad v. Nandamuri Jayakishna, AIR 2001 SC 1056, wherein in the similar facts the custody of a minor boy was given to the paternal grandparents. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, on the last date, the presence of the minor girl was ordered before this Court. This Court has seen the child and is of the opinion that she seems to be well- nourished and well adjusted in the care of her natural paternal grandfather, therefore, at this stage, granting of interim custody to the petitioners would not be in the best interest of the child so as to displace her from the present C.R.No.7048/2008 3 surroundings. It appears that respondent no.2 Chamkaur Singh-paternal grandfather has the help of the ladies of the house of his brother in the upkeep of the 14 months' girl child. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order dated 5.12.2008 (Annexure P.1) passed by Civil Judge(Senior Division), Muktsar since the welfare of the child is of paramount importance in such like matters. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the hearing in decision of the petitions under Sections 8 & 10 of the Act and under Section 13 of the Hindu Minor and Guardianship Act for custody of the child pending before it. The court should consider granting two effective opportunities each to the parties and fix the case at short intervals and decide the matter within six months from today. Parties are also directed to lead their evidence at the earliest. With the abovesaid observations, petition stands disposed of. January 23, 2009 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE