Kerala High Court Slams Child Rights Commission For Ordering 'Psychiatric Treatment' Of Woman Fighting Custody Battle With Her Husband

The Kerala High Court recently came down on the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights for its decision ordering psychiatric evaluation and treatment of a woman on an application by her husband, with whom she is involved in a custody battle for their two minor children.

In its order, the Division Bench of Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice C. Jayachandran characterised the order passed by the Commission to be one without jurisdiction:

"It is appalling that the Commission thought it fit to direct the District Child Protection Officer (DCPO), to submit a mental status report of the persons...the DCPO recommended that the welfare of the mother and children should be monitored, with the assistance of the 4th respondent (husband). The Commission based on the report of the DCPO directed psychiatric treatment to be given to the wife of the 4th respondent by an order dated 17.06.2021, which is totally without jurisdiction. We cannot also, at first blush, accept the further orders passed putting the DCPO in charge of the children and directing him to approach the Station House Officer for appropriate treatment to be given to the family without any mental status examination by a competent Doctor."

Noting so, the Court, stayed the impugned order and suo motu impleaded the Commission as an additional respondent. The Registrar of the Commission was directed to produce all files regarding the matter before the Registrar of the Court within two days. A direction was also passed to the Commission to file an affidavit explaining the orders passed.  

The Bench was hearing a habeas corpus plea filed by the father of the woman caught in the custody battle herein, seeking the production of his daughter and grandchildren.

Upon perusing the petition, the Court found the entire ordeal distressing:

"A very distressing story unfolds before us in the above writ petition, seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the production of the daughter and grand children of the petitioner. The writ petition narrates a sad tale of marital discord, from the very inception of the marriage and the wife being evicted from the marital home after giving birth to two children. The mother and children resigned to their fate were residing in a rental accommodation when the husband-the 4th respondent relentlessly harassed them in one manner or other."

The woman had filed an application for divorce before the Family Court. This provoked her husband to unsuccessfully attempt to portray her as a mental patient. The Judicial First Class Magistrate Court had also rejected the husband's application under the Mental Health Care Act, 2007.

Later, he approached the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights which directed the District Child Protection Officer (DCPO), to submit a mental status report of the persons. Citing several trivial reasons such as she is lean, has photographs of more than one religious faith in her house, wears five rudrakshas and cleans her house twice a day, the DCPO recommended that the welfare of the mother and children should be monitored, with the assistance of the husband.

It is alleged that on the strength of this order, the husband accompanied by ten other persons, trespassed into the rented residence of his wife and children and forcefully took them away. It is also the allegation that all the three, the mother and the children were injected with some medicines making them unconscious.

Considering that the husband is a lawyer and was once a temporary Judicial Magistrate who now works as a Section Officer in the Law Department, the Court found this behaviour quite problematic. 

"It is surprising that the 4th respondent took it upon himself to separate the wife and the children and admit the wife in a Mental Hospital, when, a valid proceeding initiated for providing psychiatric treatment to the wife was rejected by the competent Court."

The Court added:

"...it is not as if he doesn't know the tone and purport of the order produced as Ext.C2, which, even if passed with jurisdiction, does not clothe the 4th respondent with the authority to take the children or admit the wife, forcefully to a mental institution for psychiatric treatment."

The Bench interacted with the petitioner, the woman and her children who narrated their ordeals. The husband was also spoken to. It sought the views of a doctor who informed the Court that as of now, the mother does not seem to be suffering from any psychotic illness.

As such, it was ordered that the mother and children be allowed to go with the petitioner.

"On an evaluation done by the Psychiatrist and also on our personal evaluation, we are of the opinion that the daughter of the petitioner and the children be allowed to go with the petitioner. The husband shall not interfere in their life and if any threat is caused to them, they can approach the jurisdictional Police, who shall immediately take action to avert any such threat."

The Station House Officer, Kodungalloor was impleaded suo motu as the additional 7th respondent and directed to go to the house of the petitioner and record the statement of his daughter and her children who are alleged to have been abducted from their rental residence. If any cognizable offence is detected, an investigation shall be carried out and taken to its logical conclusion.

The hospital was also directed to produce the entire treatment records of the woman within a week. The Court further impleaded the school in which the woman is a teacher as the additional 8th respondent.  The School has also been directed file an affidavit regarding the disciplinary action taken against the woman.

Case Title: Balakrishnan v Deputy Inspector of Police & Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download The Order