G H JASMEET KAUR versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

Citation: [2019] 18 S.C.R. 1144 · Decided: 12-12-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT, INDU MALHOTRA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1144
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 18 S.C.R.
JASMEET KAUR
v.
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
(Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 4858-4859 of 2018)
DECEMBER 12, 2019
[UDAY UMESH LALIT AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 – s.9 – Hindu Minority and
Guardianship Act, 1956 – Custody of children – Respondent-
husband, a U.S. Citizen married the petitioner-wife in U.S. – After
the birth of their daughter, who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth,
petitioner-wife also obtained U.S. citizenship – After some time, both
the parties visited India – Thereafter, petitioner-wife, who was
pregnant at that time refused to return to the U.S. – Respondent-
husband instituted custody proceedings before the U.S. County Court
– The U.S. Country Court passed an ex-parte interim order and
granted temporary custody of both children to the respondent-
husband with supervised visitation rights to the petitioner-wife –
The petitioner-wife approached the Family Court in India and sought
sole & permanent custody of both the children – The Family Court
in India held that the paramount interest of the children would lie in
shared parenting by the parties in the U.S. and the petitioner-wife
was not entitled to the sole custody of the children – Aggrieved, the
petitioner-wife filed appeal before the High Court in India, which
was dismissed – Thereafter, respondent-husband filed writ of  Habeas
Corpus before the High Court in India to direct the petitioner-wife
to produce the minor children – The High Court directed the
petitioner-wife to return to the U.S. along with the two minor children
– High Court further directed the respondent-husband to move the
Superior Court in U.S. to recall earlier orders of the U.S. County
Court which directed temporary physical and legal custody of the
minor children to him and directed children to remain in custody of
petitioner-wife when she lands in U.S. – In compliance, respondent-
husband submitted affidavit to the said effect and also obtained
order from the Superior Court as per direction of the High Court –
The Superior Court in U.S. granted custody of the children to the
petitioner-wife until further custody orders were determined by the
Court after hearing both the parties – Pursuant thereto, High Court
[2019] 18 S.C.R. 1144
1144
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1145
in India directed the petitioner-wife to return to the U.S. along with
both the children – Petitioner-wife challenged the orders of the High
Court before the Supreme Court of India – Held: The following
directions were issued: The petitioner-wife to return to U.S. along
with two minor children – If petitioner-wife chooses not to return to
the matrimonial home, then respondent-husband to provide her
suitable accommodation – The petitioner-wife to provide
unsupervised access to the respondent-husband every weekend –
If petitioner-wife chooses not to jointly practice with respondent-
husband at their clinic, then parties to take steps to divide the assets
equally – The respondent-husband to get children admitted to a
reputed school in the vicinity – The respondent-husband to further
provide U.S. $8000 per month to the petitioner-wife to meet all her
expenses – Further, after the division of assets, both the parties to
share equally the expenses towards the education and upbringing
of the children.
Disposing of the Special Leave Petitions, the Court
HELD: The Court disposed of both the Special Leave
Petitions and passed the following directions:-
i.
The parties will jointly apply to the U.S. Embassy for
renewal of the U.S. Passport of their daughter and for
issuance of an American passport for their son.
ii.
The Petitioner – wife along with the two minor
children will return to the U.S. after the issuance of
the Passports of the minor children.
If the Petitioner fails to comply with the
aforesaid direction, the children will be handed over
to the Respondent – husband who will take them back
to the U.S.
iii.
The Respondent – husband offered that upon
returning to the U.S., the Petitioner – wife may return
to the matrimonial home.
If the Petitioner – wife, however, chooses to
live independently, the Respondent – husband will
provide suitable accommodation to the Petitioner –
wife with all basic amenities.
JASMEET KAUR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1146
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 18 S.C.R.
In the alternative, the Petitioner – wife may
identify a suitable accommodation, in the same vicinity
so that the Respondent – husband has

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.