Child Suffers Most Casualty In Custody Battle, Loses Everything Due To Polarization Of Family Relations: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has recently said that it is the child who suffers the most casualty in custody battle because even if either parent wins, the minor loses everything due to polarization of familial relations.A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said: “Merely having a child does not make one a 'parent', rather the one who protects the child...
The Delhi High Court has recently said that it is the child who suffers the most casualty in custody battle because even if either parent wins, the minor loses everything due to polarization of familial relations.
A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said:
“Merely having a child does not make one a 'parent', rather the one who protects the child from being torn in such parental conflicts is the closest to being an 'ideal parent'. The focus should be the child's future and not the parents' past.”
The court made the observations while dealing with a mother's appeal against a family court order declaring her and the husband, living separately, as joint guardians of the minor child.
The family court also granted visitation rights to the father, while the custody of the minor was granted to the mother till the age of 18 years.
The parties got married in 2006 and a minor boy was born from their wedlock next year. However, due to matrimonial disputes, the couple got separated in 2009. The custody of the child, however, remained with the mother.
The father the filed a Guardianship Petition for his appointment as guardian of the minor and his permanent custody, on the ground that the mother was not taking proper care of him and was not fit to safeguard the interest of the minor.
In appeal, the bench observed that the family court had rightly concluded that the custody of the child shall remain with the mother when she had been in his exclusive custody since he was two years old and is now more than 16 years.
However, the bench added that some interaction of the minor with the father was imperative for his interest and welfare, as also observed by the family court.
Modifying the overnight custody and visitations rights granted by the family court, the bench directed the mother to bring the minor to the Children's Room of Saket Family Court on every first and third Saturday of every month for three hours, for meeting the father.
It added that the father shall be permitted to talk to the child on mobile phone at least once a week, subject to the convenience of the minor.
“This Order shall remain effective till the child attains the age of majority,” the court said.
Advocates Abhishek Kumar & Shivangi Singh appeared for the Appellant.
Advocate Iashwar Singh appeared for the Respondent.
Title: X v. Y
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 76