Child’s welfare paramount in custody cases, says Punjab and Haryana High Court

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, October 20

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that a child’s welfare was of paramount consideration in guardianship cases, even though the custody deserved to be handed over to the mother in normal circumstances in the case of an infant below five.

The assertion came after Justice Suvir Sehgal refused to grant a child’s custody to a mother in a habeas corpus plea after taking into consideration the allegations of misbehaviour with the kid and the fact that she was undergoing treatment at a mental hospital.

The mother had filed a habeas corpus petition for “locating” her three-year-old son before handing over his custody to her after alleging that he had been illegally detained by her husband and in-laws. Referring to the allegations, Justice Sehgal added the court did not deem it appropriate to pass “any such order” and was of the view that it would be in the fitness of things to relegate the petitioner to alternative remedy before the family court to seek the child’s custody.

Taking up the matter, Justice Sehgal asserted a perusal of an FIR, though recommended to be cancelled subsequently, showed that there were allegations against the petitioner of beating up the child. Her father-in-law had submitted that the petitioner-mother may end up killing the child.

Justice Sehgal added equally important were the averments in a divorce petition, wherein, it was specifically stated that the petitioner was arrogant and quarrelsome. She did not even spare the minor son. She had been beating up and ill-treating him, regarding which a “recording has also been prepared”.

It was also alleged that she left behind the minor son with the father. She came back to the matrimonial home, when the matter was compromised. But her attitude and behaviour did not improve. It has also been mentioned that she was suffering from a mental ailment and getting treatment from an institute. The OPD card showed that the doctor consulted found the petitioner to be a probable case of borderline personality disorder before prescribing medicines to her. The dosage was increased on subsequent visits to the institute.

“Though in normal circumstances, when a child is below five years of age, his/her custody deserves to be handed over to the mother, who is the best person to take care of the child. Yet, the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration and the court has to keep in mind all attending circumstances before passing any such order,” Justice Sehgal asserted.

Kid beaten up: FIR

Taking up the matter, Justice Suvir Sehgal asserted a perusal of an FIR, though recommended to be cancelled subsequently, showed that there were allegations against the petitioner of beating up the child. Her father-in-law had submitted that the petitioner-mother may end up killing the child.