Says Welfare of Minor Child Must Remain Paramount Consideration; Restores Interim Custody to Mother
Jammu: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that custody of a minor child cannot be determined by treating either parent as guilty solely on the basis of allegations that have not been established before a competent court.
Delivering the judgment in a child custody dispute between estranged parents, Justice Sanjay Parihar observed that allegations and counter-allegations arising from matrimonial or criminal proceedings cannot become the deciding factor in custody cases. The Court emphasized that the child’s welfare, safety, emotional well-being, education and overall development must remain the foremost consideration.
The High Court observed that custody proceedings are not meant to determine the guilt or innocence of either parent or to settle matrimonial disputes. It held that allegations which are still under investigation or pending trial cannot be relied upon to alter the custody of a minor child until they are adjudicated by a competent court.
Setting aside an order of the trial court, which had transferred the interim custody of a six-year-old girl to her father after making observations on allegations raised by the mother in a criminal case, the High Court held that such findings were premature since the criminal proceedings were still pending investigation.
Justice Parihar reiterated that courts exercising powers under the Guardians and Wards Act function as parens patriae and are duty-bound to protect the best interests of the child. The judgment stressed that the focus should remain on the child’s emotional, psychological, educational and overall welfare rather than on the competing allegations exchanged by the parents.
Accordingly, the High Court restored the interim custody of the minor girl to her mother while granting visitation rights to the father. It further directed the trial court to dispose of the pending guardianship proceedings at the earliest and independently, without being influenced by any observations made in the appellate judgment.
Advocate Shayaan Chouhan represented the appellant-petitioner, while Advocate Virender Dev Singh appeared on behalf of the respondent.(KNC)
