Bombay High Court
SMITA SHANKAR KATKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed To be withdrawn
Holding
The Court ordered interim visitation and directed the JMFC to decide the interim custody application within two months, and disposed the habeas corpus petition.
Summary
The petitioner, a mother, filed a writ of habeas corpus seeking the return of her 5‑year‑old daughter who was residing with her husband (respondent No.2). She had already filed an application for interim custody before the JMFC, Kalyan under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, but the application was still pending. The husband argued that the mother might influence the child to make false allegations under the POCSO Act. The Court found no material to support this claim and held that the mother could pursue her legal remedies. Accordingly, the Court directed the JMFC to decide the interim custody application within two months and ordered specific video‑conferencing and supervised visitation arrangements for the mother during that period, after which the petition was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable when the child is with the father and the mother seeks interim custody under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
- Whether the Court can order interim visitation and custody arrangements pending the decision of the JMFC.
- Whether alleged risk of the mother influencing the child to make POCSO allegations warrants denial of interim access.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- habeas corpus
- interim custody
- domestic violence
- child visitation
- POCSO
- family law
- Bombay High Court
Judgment
supriya 12-WP-2421-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2421 OF 2026
SUPRIYA
PRAMOD
JAWARE
Digitally signed by
SUPRIYA
Smita Shankar Katkar ..Petitioner
PRAMOD JAWARE
Date: 2026.08.20
12:10:15 +0530 Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents
__________
Mr. Kunal Banage, a/w Nerissa Almeida, Mr. Shashank Shubham,
Mr. Darpan Gupta i/by Ms. Sneha Mishra, for the Petitioner.
Ms. Supriya Kak, APP for the Respondent/State.
Ms. Poonam Ankleshwaria, for Respondent No.2.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL &
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, JJ.
DATE : 17 AUGUST 2026
PC :
1. This is a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. The
Petitioner is the mother of a 5 year 3 month old daughter. Her
daughter is at present with Respondent No.2, i.e. the Petitioner’s
husband.
2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the
Petitioner has already approached learned JMFC Court, Kalyan,
under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act, for interim custody of the child. Learned Counsel for
1 of 4
12-WP-2421-2026
the Petitioner states that, the Application is already filed. As of
today, the Application is not numbered. In this view of the matter,
he seeks permission to withdraw this Petition. However, he
requests the Court to pass Order in the nature of an interim
arrangement for a period of two moths, within which he will take
steps before the learned JMFC Court, Kalyan, regarding the
interim custody of the child.
3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 states that,
pursuant to earlier orders of this Court, the child had met the
Petitioner at Vadodara. However, the Petitioner tried to tutor the
child and poisoned her mind against Respondent No.2. The
learned Counsel for Respondent No.2, on instructions, expressed
an apprehension that the Petitioner may tutor the child to make
allegations of the nature of an offence under the POCSO Act.
4. We have considered this situation. The child is
continuously staying with the Respondent No.2. There is no
concrete material to assume or to conclude that the Petitioner
would tutor the mind of the child to the extent which is mentioned
2 of 4
12-WP-2421-2026
by the learned Counsel for Respondent No.2. The Petitioner is at
liberty to pursue all other legal remedies available to her in
accordance with law. Respondent No.2 cannot prevent her from
pursuing her legal remedies. The Petitioner has already
approached the Court of the learned JMFC, Kalyan, for interim
custody, as mentioned above. Therefore, at least for some time,
some interim arrangement can be made so that by that time, the
Petitioner’s Application is decided by the Court of learned JMFC,
Kalyan, there is some redressal to the Petitioner. Hence, the
following Order:-
ORDER
(i) The learned Court of JMFC, Kalyan, where the
Petitioner has filed her Application, shall decide the
prayer for Interim Custody within a period of two
months from today.
(ii) During this period of two months from today,
Respondent No.2 shall allow video conferencing
facility and access to the Petitioner through that
facility to the child on every Monday, Wednesday and
3 of 4
12-WP-2421-2026
Friday between 9.00 p.m. to 9.30 p.m.
(iii) In addition, Respondent No.2 shall give exclusive
access of the child to the Petitioner on the 1st and 3rd
Sunday at Vadodara, at a public place, between
11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. The Respondent No.2 shall
not interfere in that access.
(iv) With these directions, the Petition is disposed of.
(RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
4 of 4
Checking your session…