Bombay HC Upholds Rights of Parents in Child Custody Case, Emphasises the Importance of Both Parents' Company

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court, while hearing a habeas corpus (produce person in court) petition filed by the father of an 8-year-old child who was studying in Udupi along with his mother and her second husband, made an observation regarding the rights of parents over their children's lives and destinies. The bench of judges stated that although parents have absolute rights over their children, one parent cannot deny the child the company of the other parent. This observation was made during the custody case of the child.

The division bench, comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Gauri Godse, noted, "It is important to recognize that while parents have absolute rights over the destiny and life of their children, it is not permissible for either parent to act in a way that deprives the child of the company of the other parent. Such behavior by a parent goes against the best interests and welfare of the child, and hinders the child's healthy growth."

Child being brainwashed and threatened by mother and stepfather

The mother's advocate informed the High Court on June 15 that the father could meet the child on June 23 and 24 from 10 am to 6 pm.

However, on June 23, the father informed the court that he was not allowed to meet his son.

The judges then directed the mother to produce the child before the court on July 3, 2023. The wife appeared before the court with her second husband and the son.

The father's advocate informed the High Court that in November 2022, the civil judge had granted custody to the mother but permitted the father to meet the son during the festivals of Ganpati, Diwali, Dussehra, Holi, Gudi Padwa, and twice every month.

After interacting with the child alone, the judges expressed displeasure over the conduct of the second husband, who had coached the child to believe that the petitioner was not his father, but rather the second husband was his father.

The bench also noted in its order that the mother and the second husband were threatening the child to prevent him from meeting his biological father.

"Our staff informed us that after our interaction with the child, when the child was asked to sit outside our chamber with the petitioner (father), respondent no. 3 (mother) and her second husband not only threatened the child to ensure that he does not talk to the petitioner but also reprimanded the child when he attempted to meet the petitioner," the court noted.

Police called to prevent untoward incident

It further added, "In view of such conduct of respondent no. 3 and her second husband, we had to call the police into our chamber to ensure that respondent no. 3 and her second husband do not create any untoward incident."

The division bench, while allowing the child to stay with his father, observed that the court can invoke extraordinary jurisdiction in the best interest of the minor child, and every child is entitled to the love and affection of both parents.

"Every child is entitled to have the love and affection of both parents. A child separated from one parent faces adverse psychological impact. Whenever a question arises before a court regarding the custody of a minor child, the sole and predominant criteria for consideration is only the welfare and best interest of the child," the bench averred.

On July 3, the High Court allowed the child to stay with the father until July 6. It then noted that on July 6, the child expressed his wish to stay with his father for two more days and then go back to Udupi to attend school.