Bombay High Court
CP/77/2026 of Shardul Shamprasad Dev Vs Manjiri Shamprasad Dev on 8 October 2026
OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 29 CONT. PETITION NO. 198 OF 2025 IN FA/2121/2023 Manjiri Shardul Deo VERSUS Shardul Shamprasad Deo And Ors ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Sangit Laxman Vishnu AGP for Respondents-State: Mr. S. G. Joshi Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Ms.
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
29 CONT. PETITION NO. 198 OF 2025
IN FA/2121/2023
Manjiri Shardul Deo
VERSUS
Shardul Shamprasad Deo And Ors
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Sangit Laxman Vishnu AGP for Respondents-State: Mr. S. G. Joshi Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Ms. Rashmi S. Kulkarni
...
WITH
CONT. PETITION NO. 77 OF 2026
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8184 OF 2025
IN CP/198/2025
...
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
Dated
: October 08, 2026
PER COURT :-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The learned Advocate for the respondent-husband makes a statement that, in compliance with the order dated 29.09.2026, the respondent husband has handed over custody of the minor child Riyansh to the applicant wife yesterday before the learned District Judge-1, Kopargaon. The learned Advocate states that, in view of compliance with the order, the contempt proceedings may be dropped.
2. The learned Advocate for the applicant wife does not dispute that order is complied. However, he opposes the request contending that, as in the past, a possibility of breach of the conditions of Page 1 of
2026:BHC-AUG:47487
29 CP 198-2025 visitation rights cannot be ruled out.
3. The learned Advocate for the respondent husband states that, although this Court, by judgment dated 16.10.2024, granted visitation rights to the respondent husband till the application filed at Exhibit 5 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 31 of 2025 is decided, the respondent husband shall not exercise the visitation rights granted by this Court.
4. The learned Advocate also makes a statement, in the presence of the respondent-husband, who is a practising Advocate, that henceforth there shall be no breach of the order passed by this Court granting visitation rights, as and when the husband exercises the said rights.
5. The said statement is accepted as an undertaking to this Court.
6. In view of compliance with the order and the statement made today, which is recorded as an undertaking to this Court, this Court is of the opinion that there is no purpose in continuing the contempt proceedings further.
7. The contempt proceedings are disposed of accordingly. Pending civil application is also disposed of. Page
2 of
29 CP 198-2025
8. The Civil Miscellaneous Application and the application for interim relief filed in the said proceedings shall be decided on their own merits, in accordance with law. ( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. ) vj gawade/-. Page
3 of