Twitter
Advertisement

Woman fined Rs 5,000 for denying husband access to child

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

"It's a child's right to have company of both its parents irrespective of conflicts between them. Custodial parents should not use the child as a pawn in their matrimonial dispute," said the family court, which penalised the woman, who had refused her husband access to their daughter even after the court had ordered it.

The court further held that the woman had played with the emotions of the child's father and her grandmother by refusing access to them at the last minute. It ordered the woman to pay her husband the fine of Rs 5,000 it imposed on her.

The woman had approached the family court in 2012 seeking divorce. Her husband, on March 27 this year, filed an application requesting the court to allow him and his mother access to his daughter on the occasion of her birthday on April 7. He said he was ready to meet the child in some famous mall.

The court then asked the wife to file her reply on April 1. She, however failed to appear before it, and the court posted the matter to April 2 for passing order.

On April 2, it allowed the man's plea, and said the mother could accompany the child to the mall if she so wished. The husband then couriered the order to the woman's residence.

On April 5, she approached the court pleading that the order be set aside as her doctor had advised her daughter to take total bed rest as she was suffering from viral fever. But the court rejected the application, and asked her to abide by the April 2 order.

On April 7, the man and his mother reached the mall. They were to meet the kid from 4 pm to 6pm. However, the woman, at 3.59pm, sent the man a message claiming the child was down with fever and hence she couldn't bring it to the mall.

The man then approached the court. When the court questioned her, she submitted two medical certificates of two different doctors, which said the kid had been suffering from viral fever. However, the husband pointed out that of the two certificates, one was of a doctor located far from the residence of the woman.

The court order read: "The man and his mother have been deprived access to the child on the occasion of her birthday. And the explanation given by the woman is not acceptable. Had the child been unwell and unable to come to the meeting, the man should have been informed in advance. So that he could have visited his ill child at some other place or in the hospital. However, at the last minute, the woman denied the man access to his daughter.

The woman has played with the emotions of the man and his mother. In such circumstances, the only inference that can be drawn is that the woman was not willing to give access (of the daughter) to the man on her birthday, and she has flouted the court order. In such circumstances, it is necessary to grant monetary compensation to the man to avoid such instances in future."

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement