The Supreme Court on Thursday quashed an FIR lodged against a father for taking his son from the mother’s custody. The bench of Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat, and Sudhanshu Dhulia criticized the lodging of such FIRs and burdening criminal courts with custody disputes.
The Court was considering an appeal by the father to quash the FIR registered against him. During the hearing, the Bench highlighted three important aspects in custody matters:
- Considering what is best for the child.
- Evaluating the environment the child would be exposed to with either parent.
- Assessing the mental and physical comfort level of the child.
The Court was informed that the 14-year-old child currently lives with his two elder siblings, who are 10 years older, following the mother’s passing. Four years ago, the child expressed to the Allahabad High Court his preference to stay with his mother rather than his father.
Senior Advocate Anjana Prakash, representing the mother, questioned the need to file a habeas corpus petition and suggested moving to a guardianship court instead. She emphasized that with the mother deceased, the father is the only guardian, and this situation could cause trouble for the children.
The Court clarified that it would not entertain the custody matter in this instance, as the father was only seeking to quash the FIR against him. He accepted that the child could continue living with the elder siblings and stated his willingness to contribute ₹20,000 per month towards the child’s education and other expenses.
The Bench recorded in its order: “Anjana Prakash, Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant, submits that her client is not pressing for custody of the child in these proceedings. He may initiate appropriate proceedings if he wishes so. However, as the father, he must take care of the child’s education and other expenses. The counsel submits that the father is willing to contribute ₹20,000 per month. Considering all allegations in the FIR and the totality of the circumstances, the ends of justice demand that the concerned FIR be quashed. Ordered accordingly.”
With these observations, the Court disposed of the plea, emphasizing the importance of the child’s welfare and appropriate legal channels for custody disputes.
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==
