उच्चतम न्यायालय ने बंदी प्रत्यक्षीकरण याचिका पर सुनवाई करते हुए पिता को प्राकृतिक संरक्षक (natural guardian) मानते हुए बच्चे की अभिरक्षा (custody) उसे प्रदान की और स्पष्ट किया कि नाना-नानी का दावा पिता के कानूनी अधिकारों से बेहतर नहीं हो सकता।
In a recent child custody case, the Supreme Court (SC) bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran allowed a father to get his child’s custody from maternal grandparents and said that grandparents cannot have a better claim than the father, who is the natural guardian. In this case, the bench was hearing a plea of the father of a minor child (appellant) against the High Court’s (HC’s) rejection of his habeas corpus petition. The HC denied the father custody of his child, who was with his grandparents after his mother’s demise. The HC said that the child “is comfortably residing and pursuing his education at his maternal grandfather’s house. It was also noticed that the father had re-married. On the basis of the above findings, it was opined that the welfare of the minor child; which is of paramount consideration, would be served by letting him continue with his grandfather; while the father was granted visitation rights to meet the child regularly on the first day of every month at the venue fixed by the jurisdictional Station House Officer.” The appellant approached the SC against this decision.
The SC bench overturned the HC’s decision and granted custodial rights of the child to the father (appellant). It said, “We cannot but observe that the learned Single Judge has not endeavored to elicit the child's attitude towards his father. Admittedly, the child, after his birth, was with his parents for about 10 years till the death of his mother. He was separated from the father in 2021 and has been living with his grandparents, who cannot have a better claim than the father, who is the natural guardian. There is no allegation of any matrimonial dispute when the mother of the child was alive nor a complaint of abuse perpetrated against the wife or son. The father, the natural guardian, we reiterate, is well employed and educated and there is nothing standing against his legal rights; as a natural guardian, and legitimate desire to have the custody of his child. We are of the opinion that the welfare of the child, in the facts and circumstances of this case, would be best served if custody is given to the father.” The top court also granted visitation rights to maternal grandparents, “The grand-parents shall also have visitation rights, post-handing over of custody and they shall be permitted to take the child to their residence…”