Visitation rights of a remarried father won’t be taken away: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court in India has stated that the visitation rights of the father can’t be taken away merely because he has remarried after divorce and bears another child.
The Karnataka High Court in India has stated that the visitation rights of the father can’t be taken away merely because he has remarried after divorce and bears another child.
The bench of Justices Alok Aradhe and Vijaykumar A. Patil was dealing with the appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, by which the petition filed by the respondent/husband to appoint him as a guardian and seeking custody of female child Sakeena Muskaan, was partly allowed by allowing the appellant to retain the custody of the minor female child and permitted the respondent to get access to the child by way of visitation rights.
In this case, the marriage of the appellant and respondent was solemnized and out of wedlock two children viz., Aamil Ayesh Umer and Sakeena Muskaan were born.
After a few years, the relationship between them turned out be sour and the appellant filed the divorce petition on the grounds of desertion and cruelty.
Consequently, the Additional Civil Judge, Mangalore dissolved the marriage between the appellant and the respondent.
The son is in the custody of the respondent/husband. The respondent is seeking the custody of the second child viz., Sakeena Muskaan stating that he is capable of maintaining and taking care of his daughter, he has made arrangements to admit her to English medium School and he further claims that the daughter’s future is safe in his hands.
On the aforesaid grounds, the respondent filed a petition to appoint him as guardian and further seeking custody of the minor daughter.
The Family Court has allowed the petition in-part permitting the appellant to retain the custody of the minor child Sakeena Muskaan and permitted the respondent to visit the minor child and take the child during Dasara and Christmas vacations for 5 days each and 15 days during summer vacation to his residential place.
Further, liberty was granted to the respondent to visit the minor child once in a month preferable on Sunday between 3.00 p.m. to 6.00 p.m. after prior intimation to the appellant.
High Court noted that the assertion of the appellant is that the respondent has married twice after getting divorce from the appellant and his second wife has a child out of her earlier wedlock and son Aamil Ayesh Umar is in custody of the respondent, the grant of any visitation rights would affect the health, well being of the minor daughter.
The apprehension of the appellant has been taken care of by the Family Court keeping in mind that the minor child being the female child of the appellant and respondent, the permanent custody is given to the appellant-mother.
