MRS. SHILPA AGGARWALversusMR. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.

                      [2010] 2 S.C.R. 318


A                    MRS. SHILPA AGGARWAL
                                  v.
                    MR. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.
                  Crl.M.P.No.1503 & 1504 of 2010
                                 IN
B                   Crl. Appeal No.2357 of 2009
                        FEBRUARY 2, 2010
         [AlTAMAS KABIR AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.]

C       Child and Family Welfare:

       Custody and guardianship of child - Proceedings
  pending in U.K. - Proposal submitted by husband, at the
  instance of Supreme Court*, regarding arrangements for the
D travel of the wife and the child from India to U.K. and for their
  stay and other expenses including litigation expenses -
  Direction issued to the husband to make the arrangements
  and bear the expenses for two months.

        *Shi/pa Aggarwal vs. Aviral Mittal & Anr. (2009) 16 SCR
E   287, referred to.
                         Case Law Reference:
        (2009) 16 SCR 287         referred to              Para
F       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
    No. 2357 of 2009.

        From the Judgment & Order dated 07.8.2009 of the High
    Court of Delhi at New Delhi in W.P. (Crl.) No. 1553 of 2008.

G       Devendra Singh, Ghanshyam for the Appellant.

         P.P. Malhotra, ASG, J.S. Attri, S.B. Upadhyay, Prabhjit
    Jauhar, Anumpa Kaul, S.S. Jauhar, Shailendra Sharma, Anil
    Katiyar, Anil Katiyar for the Respondents.
H                                  318
   SHILPA AGGARWAL v. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.                 319


    The Order of the Court was delivered by                        A
                           ORDER

     ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. By our order dated 9 December,
2009, we had disposed of Criminal Appeal No.2357 of 2009,
arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5995 of 2009, B
without interfering with the order of the High Court impugned in
the appeal. In order to ensure that the directions of the High
Court were complied with by the parties, we had directed the
Respondent-husband to provide the initial expenses of the
Appellant-wife and her minor child for travelling to and staying C
in the United Kingdom for at least a month to attend and contest
the proceedings initiated by the Respondent No.1 husband
before the Court of Justice, Family Division, U.K. We had also
directed the matter to be listed for further orders on 15
December, 2009, to enable the Respondent-husband to submit D
a proposal for the travel and staying arrangements for the
Appellant and her minor daughter in the U.K. for at le~st a
month.

     2. Pursuant to the said order, a proposal was duly filed by   E
the Respondent-husband on 15 December, 2009, but finding
the same to be inadequate, we had directed the Respondent-
husband to give a detailed proposal with regard to the said
arrangements. The Appellant .was also directed to file a
proposal as to how she intended to work out the order which
had been passed on 9 December, 2009. The matter was,               F
accordingly, listed on 29 January, 2010, to consider the fresh
proposals to be made by the Respondent-husband and the
views of the Appellant-wife in respect thereof.

     3. By his application dated 23.12.2009 and filed on 12 G ·
January, 2010, the Respondent-husband, inter alia, indicated
as follows :-

     (a)   That tickets had been booked by the Respondent
           for the Appellant and the minor child, Elina, to fly    HI
     320     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [201 O] 2 S.C.R.


,A               from Delhi to London by Virgin Atlantic Airways on
                 1 February, 2010, Upon arrival in the United
                 Kingdom at London Airport, arrangements had
                 been made for travel via National Express Coach
                 Service to Swindon where the respondent resides.
B
           (b)   The Respondent has a three-bed room house in
                 Swindon, U.K., where the Appellant and Elina were
                 welcome to stay with him, but in case the Appellant
                 did not want to stay in the matrimonial home, she
                 could stay in the named hotel for which bookings
c                had been made from 30 January, 2010, till 28
                 February, 2010.

           (c)   The Respondent would pay the Appellant a daily
                 allowance of 40 a day towards maintenance, upon
D                her arrival in the United Kingdom.

           (d)   The Respondent was willing to reimburse any
                 reasonable expense above 50 which the Appellant
                 may incur for herself in the U.K. till 28.2.2010.
E        4. In response to the aforesaid offers, the Appellant-wife
    agreed to stay with the Respondent in their matrimonial home
    in Swindon along with her minor daughter and her father, till
    such time as they were required to stay in the U.K. for the
    purpose of contesting the custody case, subject to the
F Respondent agreeing to undergo psychiatric evaluation and
    treatment. The Appellant also sought the permission of the
    Court to allow her to be accompanied by her father to the United
    Kingdom for which her father was ready and willing to bear his
    travelling expenses. The Appellant has also wanted the
G expenses of .her father's stay in the U.K., for the security and
    support of her minor daughter and herself, to be borne by the
  · Respondent.

          5. Apart from her place of stay, the Appellant also made
H    detailed suggestions regarding expenses that would have to
    SHILPA AGGARWAL v. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.               321
              [ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]
be incurred by her on account of travel and commuting in the      A
U.K., for the minor's admission in a Child Nursery, private
medical expenses, day-to-day expenses, including clothing,
legal expenses, recreational expenses, expenses for acquiring
a Computer/Laptop with accessories and other sundry
miscellaneous expenses which would add up to an estimated         B
8342 per month. A direction was also sought for that the
monthly expenses as indicated above for a period of six months
should be deposited in the bank account of the Appellant in the
U.K. before the Appellant left India for the U.K.

     6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties on the C
proposals and counter-proposals made for the purpose of
implementing the order passed by this Court on 9 December,
2009. What has emerged is that the Appellant-wife is willing
to stay with the Respondent-husband in their matrimonial home
at Swindon, U.K, provided he agreed to undergo psychiatric D
evaluation and treatment. Counsel appearing for the·
Respondent-husband has, in consultation with the Respondent,
who was present in Court, accepted the condition indicated by
the Appellant-wife and undertook to undergo psychiatric
evaluation and treatment on his return to the U. K. The E
Respondent- husband also had no objection to the proposal of
the Appellant to allow her father to accompany her and Elina
to the United Kingdom and to stay with her during the period
of her stay in theU.K. for the purpose of contesting the custody
case. The Respondent also agreed to bear the ancillary F
expenses involved relating to admission of the child into a
Nursery, day-to-day expenses for the Appellant, her daughter
and her father, clothing, expenses to purchase Computer/
Laptop and accessories, recreational expenses and other
sundry miscellaneous expenses.                                   G

    7. A note of discord was, however, sounded on behalf of
the Respondent-husband regarding expenses for private
medical treatment, legal expenses and payments made by the
Government into the Child Trust Fund and Child Benefit. As far
                                                                  H
    322      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2010] 2 S.C.R.


A   as expenses for private medical treatment is concerned, on
    behalf of the Respondent it was submitted that the Appellant
    and the minor child would be entitled to medical coverage as
    soon as they landed in the U.K. and that, as a result, the
    question of incurring expenses for private medical treatment did
B   not arise. As to legal expenses, it was submitted on behalf of
    the Respondent that the amount indicated by the Appellant-wife
    was extremely high and that he himself was paying his lawyers
    at the rate of 200 per hour. As far as transfer of Child Trust Fund
    and Child Benefit is concerned, it was submitted on behalf of
c   the Respondent that whatever amounts had been received by
    him on the minor daughter's account, which had remained
    unutilized, would be returned to the State, to which the
    Appellant's response was that since expenses had been
    incurred by her in India for Elina, the same should be made over
    to her instead of being returned to the Government.
0
         8. Since the points of disagreement had been narrowed
    down to the aforesaid proposals, we direct that as far as
    expenses for private medical treatment is concerned, the
    Respondent-husband shall initially provide a sum of 200 for
E   such expenses and will also arrange for medical coverage in
    terms of the Health Insurance and Life Insurance Cover for the
    Appellant, her minor daughter and her father. As far as legal
    expenses are concerned, the Respondent shall initially pay to
    the Appellant a sum of 2000 per month to enable the Appellant
F   to apply for free legal assistance under the Access to Justice
    Act, 1999, and other connected enactments and regulations,
    subject always to the condition that the same are applicable to
    her. In the event such legal aid is available to the Appellant,
    further payment by the Respondent towards legal expenses
G   shall be discontinued. Regarding transfer of the Child Trust
    Fund and Child Benefit to the Appellant, since the Appellant has
    been looking after the expenses of the child, the same should
    be reimbursed to her from the amount being held by the
    Respondent, unless legally prohibited from doing so.
H
   SHILPA AGGARWAL v. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.                    323
             [ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]
     9. Apart from the above, since all the other proposals, as       A
indicated above, have been duly agreed upon, there will be an
order to the following effect :-

     (i)     The Respondent-husband shall bear the travel
             expenses of the Appellant and her minor child from
                                                                      B
             India to the United Kingdom and, if necessary, back
             to India. The Appellant's father shall bear his own
             expenses towards travelling to the U.K.

     (ii)    During their stay in the U.K. for the purpose of
             contesting the custody case, the Appellant, her          c
             minor daughter and her father will reside with the
             Respondent in the matrimonial home in Swindon in
             London, as long as it is necessary for the purpose
             of contesting the case.
                                                                      D
     (iii)   Within 15 days of the Appellant's arrival in the U.K.,
             both the Appellant and the Respondent shall
             undergo psychiatric evaluation and treatment and
             shall also participate in marriage counselling
             programmes with a mutually agreed upon Marriage
                                                                      E
             Counsellor and the expenses for the same shall be
             borne by the Respondent.

     (iv)    The Respondent shall provide 300 per month
             towards the travelling expenses for the Appellant,
             her child and her father during their stay in the U.K. F
             for the aforesaid purpose. The Child Benefit which
             the Respondent had been receiving on account o.f
             the expenses for the minor child (Elina) should be
             made over to the Appellant on account of the
             expenses already incurred by her for the said G
             purpose, if not legally prohibited from doing so.

     (v)     The Respondent shall provide a sum .of 300 per
             month, for the child's admission in a Child Nursery,
             during her stay in the U.K.
                                                                      H
     324       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [201 O] 2 S.C.R.


A           (vi)· The Respondent shall provide an initial amount of
                  200 for expenses that may be incurred by the
                  Appellant and her minor daughter and father
                  towards private medical treatment.

            (vii)   The Respondent shall pay an amount of 1200 per
B
                    month towards food and daily incidental expenses,
                    such as toiletries, soap, detergent, etc, telephone·
                    and broadband.

            (viii) The Respondent shall provide for Health Insurance
C                  and Life Insurance cover to the Appellant and her
                   minor daughter on their arrival in the U.K.

           . (ix)   The Respondent shall pay a sum of 1600 per month
                    towards the Appellant's legpl expenses ·for
0                   contesting the custody and guardianship case.

            (x)     The Respondent shall provide for a Laptop and
                    printer for the use of the Appellant.

          10. The above amounts are to be paid into either of the
E    two accounts of the Appellant maintained by her in Barclays
     Bank, Hem el He.mpstead 20-39-07, Nos.10865826 and
     10620122, in the U.K. covering a period of two months, in two
     instalments, in modification of the earlier order directing
     arrangements to be made for the Appellant's stay in the U.K.
F    for at least a month to contest the custody and guardianship
     case.

       11. As far as airline tickets are concerned, the same may
   be purchased by the Respondent and made over to the
G Appellant, or, in the alternative, the price of the tickets may be
   deposited in the .account of the Appellant in the U.K. to enable
  the Appellant to acces·; the same for travelling toJhe U.K. in
  ·pursuance of the ord,:;r passed by this Court on 9 December,
   2009,,           ..
                         I
H.         12, Immediately on deposit of the first instalme.nt into the
   SHILPA AGGARWAL v. AVIRAL MITTAL & ANR.                     325
             [ALTAMAS KABIR, J.]

Appellant's account in the U.K., and on being provided with the       A
airline tickets, the Appellant shall proceed to the U.K. along with
her minor daughter, Elina, and, if she chooses, her father, within
a month from the date of being informed of the said deposit,
with prior intimation to the Respondent. The second instalment
is to be deposited within two weeks of the Appellant's arrival        B
in the U.K.

     13. In order to meet any other eventuality, the Appellant-
wife may make appropriate applications before the High Court
of Justice (Family Division), at London, in the pending custody       C
and guardianship case.

     14. A copy of this order be made available to the parties
forthwith.

    15. Crl. M.P. Nos.1503 and 1504 of 2010 in Criminal               o
Appeal No.2357 of 2009 are disposed of, accordingly.

R.P.                                      Petitions disposed of.