E-Paper
HC allows Pune woman to relocate to Poland with minor daughter
High court judge Bharati Dangre has quashed and set aside a Pune family court order restraining a woman from taking along her minor daughter with her to Poland without the permission of the court
High court judge Bharati Dangre has quashed and set aside a Pune family court order restraining a woman from taking along her minor daughter with her to Poland without the permission of the court. The petitioner’s estranged husband had filed an application in court; seeking a restraint order against his wife from taking their minor daughter out of the court’s jurisdiction, legally banning her from changing their daughter’s school, and directing her to deposit her passport with the court during the pendency of his application. The petitioner had filed an application on February 9, 2022, seeking the court’s permission to relocate and travel to Krakow, Poland, along with her minor daughter, in the interest of justice.
Judge Dangre in her order dated July 8, 2022, said, “Since the permission is now granted to the petitioner to travel to Poland along with the minor daughter and the procedural formalities mandate a no-objection being granted by the daughter’s father, since the petitioner is not the only custodian of the minor and the father too has right of access, it is directed that the respondent shall accord his no-objection on the visa application or any other documents which require his signature, within a period of three days from the date of uploading of the order, which will help the petitioner to obtain a visa for the daughter as well.”
“With the aforesaid direction and upon seeing that the impugned order has failed to consider the important aspect of right to development, being vested in the petitioner as she cannot be asked to choose between her child and her career, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The writ petition is allowed in the aforementioned terms,” the order further stated. Judge Dangre’s order was uploaded on the high court website on July 13, 2022.
The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on July 8, 2010, and a daughter was born out of the wedlock on July 8, 2013. The petitioner alleged that her (estranged) husband and his family were always hostile towards her and that her mother-in-law commanded a dominant position in the entire household due to which she was harassed and required to engage in various domestic activities.
The petitioner in her application stated that she is an engineer by profession and employed in a private firm in Pune. Due to her excellent performance at work, she has been offered a senior position in the establishment at Krakow, Poland. That the said position has high visibility amongst the toppers in the company and she looks at it as a great opportunity for career advancement. The petitioner pleaded that it will also provide the daughter an excellent opportunity and will ensure improvement in their standard of living.
The petitioner stated that her date of joining in Poland is scheduled as March xx, 2022, and therefore, to complete all the necessary formalities, including seeking admission for the daughter in Krakow, she has already initiated various steps. The petitioner also stated that she is likely to take her mother along with her for necessary assistance and support and that she has searched for schools in close proximity of her office campus, which will ensure minimal commuting time for the daughter. The petitioner ensured that the daughter will not have difficulty in adapting to the new environment and indeed, she will get exposure that will broaden her horizons, and pleaded that relocating to Krakow, Poland, is beneficial for her daughter’s growth and welfare.
The petitioner’s application was strongly contested by her (estranged) husband who reiterated that the allegations leveled against him are false and without any basis. The respondent opposed the relief sought by the petitioner on grounds that while she is projecting the said decision to relocate to Poland as a professional decision in the advancement of her career, the real intention behind it is to break the bond between father and daughter by denying him access, and to harass and torture both the daughter and him.
The respondent pleaded that the daughter has suffered the trauma of losing touch with her family members and friends on account of frequent shifting of residence and school and that once again, she will be uprooted as she will have to face a completely alien culture, surroundings, language and weather among other factors. The respondent expressed apprehension that if the daughter is moved away from him, he will not get to see her again as the mother might abscond and in any case, relocation of the daughter is not in her own interests.
Advocate Abhijit Sarwate with advocate Hardev Kaur and advocate Rahul Pardesi appeared on behalf of the petitioner while advocate Mayur Khandeparkar with advocate Ajinkya Udane represented the respondent.
