The Bombay High Court has issued a notice of contempt to a father for allegedly obstructing a Court Commissioner and failing to comply with Family Court orders directing him to hand over the custody of his minor daughter to the mother for Christmas vacation access.
Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe, presiding over the Vacation Court, took serious note of the Court Commissioner’s report, which stated that the handover failed due to “active, intentional and coordinated obstruction” by the Respondent and his family.
Background of the Case
The matter arose from a matrimonial dispute involving the custody of a minor child. The Petitioner (mother) had approached the Family Court seeking access to her daughter.
On December 23, 2025, the Family Court No. 6 at Mumbai allowed the Petitioner’s application (Exh. 36), directing the Respondent (father) to give access to the daughter from December 24, 2025 (11:00 am) to January 4, 2026 (6:00 pm). The court specifically directed the Respondent to bring the child to court on December 24 to hand over custody.
Following the alleged non-compliance, the Petitioner filed another application (Exh. 53), and on December 24, 2025, the Court appointed Advocate Swati Mukadam as a Court Commissioner to facilitate the custody handover with police assistance. The Court directed that the Respondent or anyone on his behalf must “not obstruct the Court Commissioner.”
Alleging that the Respondent failed to comply with both orders, the Petitioner moved the High Court via Contempt Petition No. 822 of 2025.
Submissions of the Petitioner
Advocate Ms. Firoza Daruwala, appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that the orders dated December 23 and December 24, 2025, had not been questioned by the Respondent. She argued that the Respondent’s failure to comply with the directions amounted to prima facie disobedience.
Ms. Daruwala tendered the Court Commissioner’s Report dated December 26, 2025, to the High Court. She contended that the “entire intention of the Respondent is to defeat the right acknowledged and conferred upon the Petitioner by the Family Court” regarding the access granted for the Christmas vacation.
Court Commissioner’s Observations
The High Court placed significant reliance on the report submitted by the Court Commissioner. The report recorded a “Conclusion” that the attempt to hand over custody failed. The Commissioner observed:
“The attempt to hand over custody on 24th December, 2025 failed solely due to the active, intentional and coordinated obstruction by the Respondent and his family members.”
The report further detailed the impact of this conduct on the minor child:
“Their conduct caused severe emotional distress to the minor child, who was visibly traumatized. It was evident that the child wished to go with the Petitioner but was prevented due to fear and psychological pressure exerted by the Respondent and his family obstructed me from handing over the custody of the child… to the Petitioner.”
Court’s Analysis and Decision
Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe perused the Commissioner’s Report and observed that it indicated the Respondent had not complied with the specific orders of the Family Court.
The Court noted: “Failure on the part of the Respondent to comply with the directions contained in the orders dated 23.12.2025 and 24.12.2025 passed by the Family Court No. 6, Mumbai, would prima facie, amount to disobedience.”
Acknowledging that the subject matter pertained to the custody of a minor child and the “peculiar facts and circumstances,” the Court took up the matter on an urgent basis.
Consequently, the High Court issued a Notice of Contempt to the Respondent, making it returnable on the same day, December 30, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. The Court also granted Hamdast service as requested by the Petitioner.
