High CourtsDivision Bench(2010) 11 GUJ CK 0056

Tejas Madhusudan Kothari vs Ashwinbhai Krushndas Shah and Others

Gujarat High Court · Decided on 18 November 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bankim N. Mehta, J · A.M. Kapadia, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Special Criminal Application No. 1937 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 352 words

A.M. Kapadia, J.—By way of filing of this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has prayed to provide custody of his minor child with immediate effect who, at present, is in the custody of his mother viz. Pinkalben who is residing with her father.

2.

This Court vide order dated 12.10.2010 adjourned the matter to enable the Petitioner-party-in-person to annex the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vadodara in application filed by him u/s 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Uptil now, copy of the said order has not been produced by the Petitioner before this Court. Thereafter, this Court vide order dated 27.20.2010, upon statement made by the Petitioner/party-in-person, who was desirous to see wife and know the whereabouts of his son and if they are in happy condition, he would offer Rs. 20,000/- by way of gift to them and he is ready to deposit the said amount of Rs. 20,000/- latest by 28th October, 2010.

3.

On condition, this Court issued Notice to the Respondent No. 18 making it returnable on 18th November, 2010. However, Registry has issued Notice to Respondent without being deposited the amount as aforesaid.

4.

Therefore, we direct the Registrar (Judicial) to explain as to why Notice has been issued without there being deposit of Rs. 20,000/-, by way of condition precedent, for issuance of Notice. Admittedly the said amount has not been deposited by the Petitioner.

5.

Today when the matter is called out, Petitioner, who is party-in-person, is not present before the Court whereas Pinkalben, wife of the Petitioner is present before the Court along with her father and uncle. She states that the male child named Aumshree, who is aged about 5 years, is in her custody since last 1 1/2 years, who is studying at Vidyani school.

6.

In view of the above, petition is dismissed. Notice is discharged.

7.

Registry is directed to place the matter on 25.10.2010 along with explanation as to why Notice has been issued without the amount of Rs. 20,000/- deposited by the Petitioner.