Bombay High Court Denies Custody to Father Over Anger Issues and History of Abuse
The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a father’s plea for custody of his 3-year-old daughter, citing his anger issues and history of abusive behavior towards the child’s mother.
The case was heard by Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Gauri Godse, who were responding to a habeas corpus petition filed by the 41-year-old UK-based father. He had requested the custody of his US citizen daughter, who is currently living in Mumbai with her Indian mother.
The court observed that the father had a record of being abusive on multiple occasions and showed uncontrolled anger. “Considering the past conduct of the petitioner, having anger issues, it will not be safe to hand over custody of the child to him,” the court stated.
Child’s Welfare Comes First
The judges emphasized that the child’s safety and well-being are more important than anything else. They ruled that the young daughter should remain with her mother in India, as it is in her best interest.
According to the petition, the parents married in December 2018 in New York, and had their daughter in March 2020. Soon after, their relationship began to fall apart. In 2021, they signed a marriage reconciliation agreement, but the problems continued.
In 2022, the couple decided to move to Singapore. They rented a home and enrolled the child in a preschool there. However, in November 2022, while the father was in the UK, the mother left Singapore and returned to India with the child.
International Custody Dispute
The father obtained a joint custody order from a Singapore court and approached the Bombay High Court to enforce it in India. He claimed the mother illegally brought the child to India, and that Singapore was the child’s familiar home.
The mother, however, argued that she returned to India for the child’s safety, as advised by Singapore police, and submitted evidence of violent behavior from the father, even while in Singapore.
The court rejected the father’s claim that Singapore was the child’s main home, saying seven months is too short for a 3-year-old to build strong ties to a place. The bench also highlighted the emotional need for the child to be with her mother.
Court Recognizes Mother’s Rightful Action
The judges took note of a history of domestic violence and an agreement where the father was to undergo therapy, pay legal fees, and have supervised access to the child. Despite this, the mother had filed complaints in Singapore and India.
After reviewing all facts, the Court said, “The respondent (mother) is justified in coming to India along with the child, and it cannot be said that she has illegally detained the child.”
Since custody cases were already pending in both Indian and Singapore courts, the Bombay High Court refused to comment further on the case’s merits and dismissed the petition.
Case Title: R v State of Maharashtra (2023:BHC-AS:36261-DB)
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
