Date - 07 .01.

2023
To
The Regional Passport Officer
Regional Passport Office
Bhikaji Cama Palace, R K Puram
New Delhi - 110066
I
Subject - Complaint regarding issua
.
f U
nee o passport no 8944069
Babbar from his father Mr. Amit Babbar
to minor child Master Sarthak
• I
I
Respected Sir/ Ma'am,
I
I wish to state/ inform you as under:
1. I am Amit Babbar, father of Sarthak Bab bar (holder of passport no U8944069). . .
2. Mother of ~arthak Babbar, Mrs Bharti Babbar (Passport No u 8927628) & I are living
separately since May 2020. 1 have visitation rights of my child Sarthak Babbar as per the
direction of the honorable Family court Judge dated 2 1.06.21 (copy enclosed). I fear that,
Bharti might take away Sarthak to sorrie foreign country, therefore being the father of _
Sarthak,
I do object to the issuance of passport to Sarthak without consent. '
3. In view of the above facts, 1 request you to please impound the passport no U8944069 issued
to Sarthak Babbar under section 10(3) (b) of Passport act 1967 because Bharti got the passport
reissued without my consent and also impound the passport no U8927628 issued to Bharti
Babbar under section 10(3)(b) of Passport Act 1967, as the passport reissued by the
suppression of Marital Status.

Looking forward for the positive action from your side.

Thanking you in anticipation.

it Babbar
29-C, Pocket - F,
Mayur Vihar, Phase - 2,
Delhi -110091
Mobile No - +91-987301)3853 ~I
~\-QW\~t~a!&\\o~ •(JJ'W\
I
HMA N o.483/21
Alllit Babbar vs Bharti Babbar

21.06.2021
4.00 p.m.

Present: None.
Today the case is fixed for passing orders on the
application under Section 26 ofHMA filed on.behalf
of the petitioner through e-portal during summer
vacation.
Vide separate order passed today, the petitioner is
allowed to meet and interact with the minor child
Sarthak through virtual/digital mode only keeping in
view the Pandemic Covid 2019, on every Sunday
from 11.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon. Both the
grandparents · are also at liberty to interact with the
minor child. During the meeting, it is expected from
both the parents that they_,,would maintain congenial
and good atmosphere which · is necessary for the

welfare of the child. Accordingly, the application

under Section 26 of HMA filed by petitioner during

summer vacation is disposed of.

Copy of this order be sent to the Counsel for· the

parties through whatsapp/e-rnail.

Put up for filing of WIS and reply to the

application under Section 26 of HMA filed along with the
petition on date already fix d .
e I.e. 24.08.20 21 •

(SANJAY KUMAR)
. . 1Judge ,family Courts.
Pnnc1pa
E t n·15 tt Karkardooma, Delhi
aS · 21.06.2021
 -----
IN THE COURT OF pR(N CIPALJJJJl~E FAMILY COURT, DJSTRlCT
. . NORffl~LBI. _
Petition No. -/2021 r;::=====:;:=,-

AmitBabbar
S/O Sh. Hans Raj Babbar
RIO 29-C, Pocket -F,
MayurVihar, Phase 2
DELID-110091
9873003853(M) 1. <iIJ ... ... PETITIONER

/Ms..~1~~..
VERS~..a reeelved for ~tl.09· . ,',,.. llo,l

Bharti Babbar
W/O Sh. AmitBabbar
D/O Smt Sbashi Suri
F.1O B-9/163, Sector 3, Robini
Delhi-110085
It !s allocated Sh ..
1"'. ln:l;,c:JJudgefJ:Jdge
r.~.r:li;i C:,t..it..'l: Roh!nl cou
c.1 ~JA.MJZ.00.P.M
,,, U!t~3 3 t1 \~
)
L r< J U
D ' '1 '
l fer

Prl~clpal' i.id~e
Farr,!!y_ urts
Rahln. . blo:,..~~l'T'
+917827010182(M) flLL!~,G No ... , ;p 'i'IJJ.C,l'U.

PETITION UNQER SECTION--25 READ WITH SECTION 10 OF THE

GUARDIANSHIPS AND WARDS ACT,. 1890 FOR CUSTODY OF -
MINOR SON BY FATHER/NATURAL GUARDIAN OF THE MINOR.
. .

,, MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWEIB:

I I

1. That the marriage between the~etitioner and Respondent was solemnized

on 19.09.2009 with Hindu Rites at /»>Ya Samaj ~dir, HaritVihar Burari
in presence of some Family Members including cousins and friends of
petitioner. A ·Certificate issued by Ar'Ja Samaj Mandir along with
photographs is annexed herewith.

2. That out t!c: ~~q·.:a: ---~· \·y namely Sarthak was born on 26-
09-2011 •
I

1
~!&J tst.u 'th the
Petitioner/Father and
Respond nt/MotlieJ: !!Rd alo~ with : nts of Petitioner i.e. Mr Hans Raj
\ z NA~ -2U22 P
J
Co~~1ngAi'to.. . J;:,::·mmi
V
ucy
~h'IiiI (;l:I,·'( rr;rn;;,, (~u~
.,_ f" a "Q,ll]l
- ......:.:.:-~,Ii' \ ,:,. .i\i.O:@_
I _Ii
I
----·- -
/
I
I
I
I
/

.QI:lYIRTJJA,L Ht;AJUNG
GP No. 26/2021
Amit Babbar Vs. Bharti Babbar
17-01-2022
Pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi vide order bearing no. 896/RG/DHC/2021
dated 30-12-2021, in view of the sudden spurt and spike in
Covid-19 cases in the NCT of Delhi and issuance of
'yellow alert' in Delhi by GNCTD, the matters before the
Court are being taken up through Virtual Mode w.e.f.
03-01-2022 till further orders.
PRESENT: Sh Shailender Babbar, Ld. counsel for the
petitioner.
Sh. F. K. Jha, Ld. counsel for the respondent.

.Ld. counsel for the petitioner states that an urgent

application u/s 151 CPC for seeking interim relief for stay on
'out oflndia movement' of the minor child has been filed.
Ld. counsel for the respondent states that
respondent is not available due to covid and no formal reply to
the said application is necessary.
Arguments on the said appHcation heard.
. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner recently got to know that the respondent along with
the minor child, namely, Sarthak, is in advance stage of seeking
Resident Permit/Visa for going to Canada and respondent intends
to abscond with the minor child and the petitioner has filed
~
~itnll
--
~
1\\
·
_ ·
,.i~
t,g
I Ii: · ,
:.:)
suspicion of moving the
t. ng w, tlie minor c. d ut oflndia.
Contd ..2
.z 5 tiMl 2022
:..I
 (i
I

I
I

-2-

Ld, counsel for the respondent has submitted that

the non-applicant/respondent has no intention to take the minor
child outside the country, without the pennission of his
father/applicant, except for education purposes for the better
future prospects of the minor child.
During the course of arguments, Ld. counsel for the
applicant has taken the Court through the annexures to the
application wherein there is trail of Emails with the Immigration -
Authorities of Canada. Upon going the trail of E-mail, it is clear
that the said application of the respondent for immigration to
Candaa has been aborted, on objections raised by the
applicant/father and is no longer pending with the said authorities
who have communicated that it shall not be considered due to
specific in-conducive objections and the apprehensions between
the parents of the child.
Taking the entirety of the facts and circumstances,
age of the child who is 10 years and is a school going child,
apprehensions of the father in not allowing his minor child to go
to abroad at this tender age and also keeping in view the pending
matrimonial disputes between the parents of the child, the Court
is of the considered view that the look after and welfare of the
minor child is the moral and legal responsibility of both the
paren~. Either of the ar not be allowed to take a
unequi ~TefsESiai ture and betterment of the
education in I d .
child. he,quality
Z Sof~AR ZOZZ tn a 1s not sueh that atthe age
· 1 · Contd .. 3
J

Copvlr'1 r "'· ·...,

r.
 -3-
of 1Oyears, it may be of Utrnost necessity
of the child to go and peruse the sch •
for the future prospects
001
in abroad. If any such
, immigration decision are to be taken, th h .
ey s ould be done either
jointly or "'.ith the consent of both the parents, till the age of
majority of the child. For thc forgoing facts and reasons, it is
directed that the minor child, Sarthak, aged Io years, shall not
be taken outside the territory of the country, without the
expressed permission of th is Court or any other- of Court of
competent jurisdiction.
The application accordingly stands allowed and
disposed of.
WS to the petition and reply to the application u/s
12 of the Guardians and be filed by the respondent within four
weeks. Advance copy to be supplied to the other side.
Replication/rejoinder, if any, be filed within six weeks thereafter.
Put up <>n 20-10-2022 for completion of pleadings
and further proceedings.
DI !!gaod
PREETI
AGRAWAL 1.
Gt,JPTA ~01.17
10ol7123+0ll30