HC shows sensitivity towards child, refrains from passing ‘adverse’ orders against father
Alessandro Portioli breached the orders of the Bench as he was asked not to travel back to Italy
Bombay High Court has once again shown that it is sensitive towards children and is passing orders keeping in mind their feelings. The HC recently refrained from passing an adverse order against an Italian father who had allegedly fled along with his adopted daughter without the permission of the court.
This ‘sensitivity’ was shown by a Division Bench of Justice Vidyasagar Kanade and Justice Anant Badar as the judges heard a petition filed by a Goan woman.
Esmenia D'souza married Italian national Alessandro Portioli. According to D’souza, she and her husband were granted the guardianship of a seven-years-old girl who was abandoned by her biological parents. Subsequently, the couple had parted ways in 2011 and D’souza had dragged her now estranged husband to a family court, seeking divorce decree.
The family court in Pune had directed to hand over the girl’s custody back to the shelter home, from where she was adopted. The order was then challenged in HC and Justice Kanade was supposed to decide in whose custody the child was to be given.
As the proceedings were pending, Portioli along with his daughter left the country without informing anyone. He had breached the orders of the Bench as he was asked not to travel back to Italy till the proceedings are completed.
During the course of proceedings, several orders were passed by the Bench directing Portioli to return to India and appear before the court. The Bench had earlier directed officials of the Ministry of External Affairs to trace out Portioli and the minor girl, as D’souza had apprehended that he has abducted the child.
Despite a series of court orders, Portioli has not appeared before the Bench and has clearly breached the orders of the court that can attract contempt proceedings.
However, in a recent hearing, Justice Kanade showed sensitivity and refrained from passing any adverse orders. “Despite several orders giving assurance to the husband that if he came back to India along with child no coercive steps would be taken to prosecute him, he did not return the child,” Justice Kanade said.
Justice Kanade added, “We are of the view that this is a very sensitive matter and any adverse order may traumatise the child and therefore, this matter needs to be handled with kids’ gloves. We hope and trust that the amicable solution would be arrived at between the parties so that consent terms can be filed and an appropriate order can be passed by this court.”