Bombay High Court
JISHA NIKHIL KATARIYA PRATAP GOPALDAS TALREJAversusNIKHIL PREM KATARIYA
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Holding
The Family Court’s order under section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act is lawful and cannot be set aside; the writ petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner‑mother filed a writ petition challenging a Family Court order dated 9‑December‑2025 that, under section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, directed her to allow supervisory visitation for the father‑respondent on the first and third Saturdays of each month. The parties were involved in parallel divorce and maintenance proceedings, and the mother had initially consented to the visitation schedule but later withdrew consent, demanding co‑habitation before allowing access. The High Court examined whether the Family Court had jurisdiction and whether the order was illegal or violative of any right. It held that the Family Court acted within its powers under section 26 and that no jurisdictional or legal error warranted interference. Consequently, the writ petition was rejected and the order upheld.
Issues considered
- Whether the Family Court had jurisdiction to direct supervisory visitation under section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Whether the order granting limited visitation rights to the father is illegal or violative of any statutory or constitutional provision.
- Whether the High Court should interfere with the Family Court's visitation order in a writ petition.
Legislation cited
- Hindu Marriage Act — s. 26
Subjects
- visitation rights
- custody
- family law
- Hindu Marriage Act
- section 26
- writ petition
- child access
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:10792
1 wp 1437.26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
72 WRIT PETITION NO.1437 OF 2026
Jisha Nikhil Katariya Pratap Gopaldas Talreja
VERSUS
Nikhil Prem Katariya
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. M.G. Patil
Advocate for Respondent: Mr.A.D. Sonar h/f D.D Pande
...
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
Dated : March 09, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Present writ petition takes exception to the order dated
9.12.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Jalgaon below
Exhibit nos.16, 18, 23, and 24 in petition no.A-180 of 2024.
2. It appears that various matrimonial proceedings are
pending between parties before the Family Court. Husband
had filed proceeding for divorce. Wife had filed proceeding for
maintenance.
3. Parties were relegated to Marriage Counselor on the
point of visitation rights/access to the non-custodian
parent/father. Accordingly, on 21.10.2024 consensus was
arrived at between parties and custodian parent-mother had
agreed for access of son to father on first and third Saturday of
2 wp 1437.26.odt
every month between 3.00 to 5.00 pm. in the children
complex. It appears that subsequently, custodian
parent/mother retracted her consent. Now, she is putting
condition that she should be permitted to resume co-
habitation, otherwise, she is not ready to give access of child to
the father.
4. In these contingencies, Family Court in exercise of
powers under section 26 of the Hindu Marriage act passed
impugned order directing petitioner-mother to give supervisory
access of child to the non-custodian parent/father in children
complex on first and third working Saturday of every month
between 3 to 5 pm.
5. A father is natural guardian of a child, who is hardly 3
years. At this stage, it would benefit child if both the parents
have access with him. Now, custody of child is with mother.
Father is also entitled for visitation rights or at least access to
the child. The impugned order gives limited access of child
with respondent/father. No illegality or jurisdictional error can
be found in impugned order to interfere under writ jurisdiction
of this Court. In result, writ petition stands rejected.
( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. )
AAA/- ….
Checking your session…