In Brief
Dr. Amit Kumar (appellant) and Dr. Sonila (respondent No.1) divorced by mutual consent in December 2016, having agreed during the statutory six-month reflection period that custody of their two minor children would remain with the appellant. After the appellant's transfer to Jammu and demand for the respondent's agreed financial contributions, the respondent sought to claim custody, arguing the consent was forced. The Supreme Court upheld the original consent decree, holding that it represented a conscious, binding agreement between two qualified, equal parties after full opportunity for reflection. The Court rejected the respondent's attempt to overturn the arrangement based on the children's temporary preference (expressed while in boarding school) and remarriage of the appellant, finding the custody challenge was designed to avoid financial obligations. The appeal was allowed and custody restored to the appellant.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.