Karnataka High Court
WP/25349/2026 of DR KEERTHI Vs DR RITESH G V on 9 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010555452026 NC: 2026:KHC:49132 WP No. 25349 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 25349 OF 2026 (GM-FC) BETWEEN: DR.KEERTHI DAUGHTER OF V.MUNIYAPPA WIFE OF
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 25349 OF 2026 (GM-FC)
BETWEEN:
DR.KEERTHI
DAUGHTER OF V.MUNIYAPPA
WIFE OF DR. RITESH G.V.
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
NO. 438, 6TH B MAIN ROAD,
2ND BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT,
KALAYAN NAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560043
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI.S.SREEVATSA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI/SMT.YUKTHA ANIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
DR.RITESH G.V.,
SON OF VASANTHA KUMAR G.V.
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO. 6,
GREEN PARK LAYOUT,
RAMAMURTHY NAGAR,
BENGALURU – 560 043
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VINITHA P.C., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
Digitally
signed by
SUVARNA T
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT QUASHING
ORDER DATED 21.02.2026 (ANNEXURE - A) IN G AND WC NO.
397/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL FAMILY JUDGE, FAMILY COURT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
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.
ORAL ORDER
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “MAIN PRAYER WHEREFORE, the Petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ quashing Order dated 21.02.2026 (ANNEXURE-A) in G&WC.No. 397/2024 on the file of the IV Additional Family Judge, Family Court at; (b) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ quashing Order dated 17.01.2026 on I.A.No.8 at (ANNEXURE - F); in G&WC No.397/2024 on the file of the IV Additional Family Judge, Family Court at
(c) Direct a departmental enquiry in respect of the Office Note in the Order Sheet of G&WC No. 397/2024 dated 21.02.2026 on the file of the IV Additional Family Judge, Family Court at (ANNEXURE - A); (d) Pass such other appropriate Order or Orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.”
2. According to the petitioner, the order is passed by the Family Court granting custody on festival days between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. However, the order sheet reflects the time
HC-KAR
as 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. in one place, while the order portion states 11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. It is stated that there was no mistake or error in the timings of 11 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. as originally shown in the order, and the timings were fixed after hearing the parties and were being adhered to by the parties. A visual scrutiny of the order sheet dated 21.02.2026 shows that the order was on two pages, and the order modifying the timings in the order dated 17.01.2026 is completely out of place, without any reference to the parties being present or heard, or any application being filed to seek an order from the Court. It is stated that there should be a departmental enquiry in respect of the office note in the order sheet.
3. When the matter came up before a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court has ordered for an enquiry into the matter. The Principal Judge, Family Court, has placed a report in a sealed cover before this Court stating that the Presiding Officer is now transferred. However, the record reveals that she herself made corrections, and at a later point of time, it was clarified.
HC-KAR
4. These kinds of allegations made in the writ petition, on such a minor issue of visitation from 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. or 11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m., and seeking enquiry are most unwarranted. The petitioner ought to have sought clarification from the very same Court instead of coming before this Court and making allegations and seeking action against the concerned. The Judges at the Family Court, Bengaluru, are working with tremendous work pressure, and some human errors here and there may occur. If these kinds of allegations are made against judicial officers, nobody would be ready and come forward to work in the Family Courts.
5. This has become a routine practice in the Family Courts that the parties are ventilating their egos and frustrations on everyone around, this case is one classic example. It is made very clear that with these kinds of allegations, if writ petitions are filed hereafter, appropriate orders will be passed, and costs will be imposed on the petitioner.
6. Coming to the issues that are involved in the case, admittedly, the father is having visitation on three alternate
HC-KAR
days a week, festival days and on the child’s birthday. This Court in the earlier order has observed that as the mother is also a doctor and working, 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. is the appropriate time, so that the mother will also be able to spend time with the child. In those circumstances, this Court is passing the following order:
ORDER
i. The order dated 17.01.2026 passed in I.A.No.8 in G&WC.No.397/2024 and the order dated 21.02.2026 passed by the IV Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru, is modified.
ii. The respondent/father can have parenting time between 10.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.
iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
MEG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 5 *MR/AK