Jagirdar bowls googly at Kumble

After family court granted Kumble custody of child, biological father approached HC questioning the order, which in turn directed issuance of emergency notice to the former cricketer. Imran Gowhar reports

Jagirdar bowls googly at Kumble

u00a0
The decade long legal battle over custody of a child between Anil Kumble's family and the child's biological father Kumar Jagirdar continues, as the latter approached the High Court questioning the family court order.

Based on the HC's direction, an emergency notice has been issued to the respondents and the next hearing will be held following their response.

Not eligible: The Family Court earlier rejected Jagirdar's application
stating that he was not entitled to custody on the ground that there was
no female member living with him to look after the child. File pic

In his petition, Jagirdar contended that the family court, over sighted Supreme Court while passing the order dated January 29, 2004. The SC observed that the prospect of the arrival of a second child in the respondent's family is another circumstance, which would be in favour of the child.
u00a0
Basis of questioning
However, after the birth of the second and thereafter the third child, the respondent (Chetana) and her present husband (Anil Kumble) had become non-cooperative in implementing the Apex Court's directions.

Further, Jagirdar, who had no other children through his second wife, could have bestowed his undivided attention, natural love and affection, as against the respondents who was busy and preoccupied with bringing up their two infant children, which would result in the neglect of the appellant's only daughter.

The Family Court earlier rejected Jagirdar application stating that he was not entitled to custody on the ground that there was no female member living with him to look after the child. Considering this, Jagirdar married Dr Savitha, despite which custody was rejected citing 'stepmother' as the reason.

No contact
Jagirdar further contended that the court did not allow him any contact with his daughter for five months before she was called to testify before the court, while deciding on custody.

"During this period, the respondents constantly brainwashed and tutored the child to get the order in their favor. Based on the child's deposition, the court decided to handover the custody rights to Kumble and even passed derogatory remarks against me," Jagirdar said.

Reacting to this, the Kumble's advocate C V Nagesh said that they are ready to face the challenge.

"Litigation is like two faces of a coin. Had we been in the appellant's position, we too would have approached the HC if we had lost the case. However this will ultimately serve no purpose and its unfortunate that the child has to bare the brunt," Nagesh said.

"Exciting news! Mid-day is now on WhatsApp Channels