The welfare of the Minor is a paramount consideration while deciding the custody of the minor child: Supreme Court
The rights of the parents are irrelevant while deciding the custody of the minor child. The best interest of the minor remains in the custody of one of the parents and the rights of the other parents are bound to be affected. A custody dispute involves human issues which is always complex and complicated held by the Supreme Court before the JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI & ABHAY S. OKA in the matters of Vasudha Sethi V. Kiran V. Bhaskar. [CrA 82 of 2022]
The Appeal arises out of an unfortunate dispute between the appellant (wife) and the respondent (husband) over the custody of the minor child. The parties were married in New York, the United States of America and the child is a citizen of the USA. The appellant wishes to stay in the USA along with their minor son. It is the respondent responsibility to pay a sufficient amount per month as maintenance if the appellant and minor son travel. The natural guardian for the minor boy/ girl is the father but ordinarily, the minor has not completed the age of 5 years then the natural guardian is the mother.
The learned counsel states that “while dealing with the issue of habeas corpus cannot direct the parents to leave India and to abroad with the child. If the order passed against the wishes of the parents it will offend the right to privacy”.
The petition for Habeas Corpus was filed by the respondent for directing to release the minor child from the illegal custody of the appellant. In Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 Section- 13(1) states that the appointment or declaration of a guardian of a minor, the welfare of the minor shall be the paramount consideration. The learned counsel in the impugned judgement held to adopt an agreed joint patenting plan.
The Hon’ble Court held that “the respondent is held liable to take custody of the child and mutually agreed’’. Respondent is entitled to make a video call to talk to the minor child for about half an hour every day. Appellant is not willing to visit the USA along with the son. The custody of the child involves straight jacket formula to decide the issue of custody which is the paramount interest of the minor as always a question of fact.
Click here to read the Judgment.
Judgment Reviewed – Kaviya S