Child Is Not A Commodity, Parent’s Income & Better Education Prospects Not Sole Criteria For Deciding Custody

Case: Nimish S. Agrawal v. Smt. Ruhi Agrawal

Coram: Justice Goutam Bhaduri

Case No.: FAM No. 18 of 2019

Court Observation: “The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor.”

“A child being not a property or commodity and the issue relating to the custody of minor and tender aged children have to be handled with love, affection, sentiments and by applying human touch to the problem. Therefore, considering the same and as per the desire of the child, we deem it appropriate that the child would be better in the custody of her mother.”

“A child may be comfortable in the company of someone who may have a lower financial status; it is always contrary to general expectations. It is not the measurement to be carried out while deciding the child’s custody.”

“It is not a tug of war between wealth and personality traits. Placement of the child in the best boarding school cannot be a benchmark for happiness of a child. A child may be happy in a regional local school in company of the parents instead of living in isolation in the hostel the domino effect may be otherwise.”

“The education includes knowing her own culture, family traditions, and the respect for the elders. Consequently, therefore, the ambition expressed by the father would not be a sole criteria and it may prove to be a dilapidated joy ride for children specially in a battle between the parents. The crisis of the like nature would not abate until peace prevails.”

“Instead the Court has to balance the need and comfort of the child as the progress of the child has to take place despite all hurdles i.e. battle in between the parents. In a custody battle the Court has to pay heed to the wounds of a child which is at the bottom of the pyramid which is caused by the cases and counter cases in between mother and father.”

Previous Posts

Review Committee Declared Guarantors As Wilful Defaulters Without Making Any Distinction Between Borrower And Guarantor: Kerala High Court

Honorable Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Would Warrant Quashing Of Criminal Prosecution Arising From Same Set Of Facts: Orissa High Court

Separate IGST On Indian Importers For Ocean Freight Against Concept Of “Composite Supply”, Violates Section 8 CGST Act: Supreme Court

Hindu Succession Act – HUF Property Is Presumed For Be For Widow’s Maintenance When She Has Its Settled & Exclusive Possession: Supreme Court

Continuing Unlawful Activity For Gaining Advantages Other Than Economic Or Pecuniary Is Also An “Organised Crime” Under MCOCA: Supreme Court

Arbitration Reference Not Maintainable If Filed After Admission Of Insolvency Resolution Petition U/s 7 IBC Download Judgement

Company Tribunal Not A Labour Court Or Administrative Tribunal To Focus Entirely On Removal Of Director: Supreme Court In Tata-Mistry Case

Second Appeal: Judgment Should Not Be Interfered With By High Court Unless There Is A Substantial Question Of Law, Reiterates Supreme Court

Proclaimed Offender Declaration Under Section 82(4) CrPC Cannot Be Made Against Person Accused Of Sections 406, 420 IPC