InCriminal Appeal No. 3736 of 2023 -SC- Supreme Court prioritizes child's well-being; father retains custody in divorce battle
Justice Vikram Nath & Justice Rajesh Bindal [06-12-2023]

Read Order: Selvaraj V. Revathi

Chahat Varma

New Delhi, December 8, 2023: The Supreme Court has decided a child custody case in favour of the father, emphasizing the importance of the child's welfare. While granting custody to the father, the Court also ordered visitation rights to the mother, acknowledging the value of a child's relationship with both parents.

The present appeal arose from a dispute regarding the custody of a child born to the parties of the appeal. The marriage took place on 16.05.2010, and the child, Manish, was born on 18.02.2011. Subsequently, a matrimonial dispute led to the filing of a divorce petition by the appellant. In response, the respondent filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking maintenance and interim custody of the child. Legal battles ensued, with courts at various levels, including the Madras High Court, upholding the custody order in favour of the respondent.

The division bench, comprising of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Rajesh Bindal,noted that with the aim of exploring the potential for a settlement between the parties, the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre and the report from the Mediator revealed that the respondent was unwilling to engage in mediation, and the child, who had reached the age of nine years and nine months by that date, expressed a lack of desire to go with the mother.

During the course of the proceedings, the bench found it fitting to engage with the child. The bench interacted with the child and observed that the child flatly refused to go with his mother and even refused to talk to her.

The bench further took note of the report submitted by Ms. V. Mohana, senior counsel, regarding her interactions with the child and the parents. The report indicated that the counsel made extensive efforts to facilitate communication and understanding between the parties involved. Initially, the child showed reluctance to interact with his mother but, after the counselling, he reluctantly agreed to have minimal interaction with her. The report also highlighted that the child, while initially, was resistant to meeting his mother, later consented to monthly meetings at a public place on scheduled Sundays and to receiving phone calls from his mother.

The bench remarked that it is beneficial for a child's upbringing to have the love and affection of both parents. The bench acknowledged the efforts of Ms. V. Mohana, senior counsel, suggesting that with her assistance, the child may have the opportunity to receive the affection of his mother, even if he continues to live with his father, where he has been residing since birth.

In conclusion, the bench, considering the child's age of 12 years and 9 months and based on the interaction in court, expressed the opinion that granting custody to the respondent-mother at this stage would not be in the child's best interest. Nonetheless, an agreement allowed the mother to call him and granted her visitation rights.

With the above said observations, the present appeal was disposed of.