In a significant legal battle focusing on the welfare of the child, a recent judgment by the Supreme Court of India has set a precedent in custody cases. The case, revolving around the upbringing and education of a young girl named Aditi, highlights the paramount importance of considering the child’s well-being above all else. This judgment has far-reaching implications for similar cases in the future, emphasizing the need for a nurturing environment for children facing parental disputes.
Facts
- The parties had a matrimonial dispute since 2006.
- A girl child named Aditi was born to the appellant and the respondent on 09.04.2007.
- Various legal proceedings were initiated including a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
- The Family Court directed the admission of Aditi to a boarding school in Ooty.
- A settlement between the parties included alimony and maintenance for Aditi.
- Both parties appealed the judgment of the Family Court.
- The appellant filed an FIR against the respondent under Section 498A of the IPC in 2008.
- After various interactions and reports, the child was to be sent to school following custody arrangements.
- The respondent gave up custody claim and requested the child to be admitted to a boarding school at his expense.
- The Guardianship Case was decided by the Family Court in 2016.
- The High Court interacted with the child on several occasions.
- Divorce proceedings were initiated in 2008 and a decree was granted in 2009.
- Legal issues regarding the custody and education of the child were addressed in the judgment.
- The High Court increased the visiting hours of the respondent.
- The respondent was permitted to get the child registered for admission in La Martiniere Girls School, Kolkata.
- SLP(C)Nos.37915-37916 of 2016 filed by the appellant were dismissed by the Supreme Court on 23.12.2016.
- The High Court directed the child to be admitted in Sacred Heart Convent School, Jamshedpur on 28.11.2016.
- The Family Court directed that the child shall continue in the custody and guardianship of her mother till she reaches the age of 11 years and continue her education in Jamshedpur.
- The High Court disposed of the matter in terms of the settlement for the Academic Year 2018-19.
Also Read: Supreme Court Ruling on Recruitment Rules Challenge
Arguments
- The appellant’s child is not doing well at Good Shepherd International School, Ooty and has faced medical issues.
- Allegations state that proper medical care was not provided by the School.
- Medical prescriptions from Dr. Devi Prasad Rao and Zila Mansik Swasthaya Karyakaram have been submitted as evidence.
- The appellant has requested for the child to be educated in Jamshedpur where the mother resides.
- An application has been filed requesting admission to a reputed school in Jamshedpur or a boarding school near Jamshedpur for the Academic Session 2019-2020.
- The child has shown overall development and active participation in activities inside and outside the classroom with no health complaints.
- She has excelled in all fields at school, showing progress and growth as evidenced by her promotion to Class VI and increase in weight and height.
- The appellant, instead of appreciating the child’s development, has attempted to remove her from school using various tactics.
- The appellant’s actions have been aimed at alienating the child from her father, creating hindrances in her normal development.
- The child has been influenced by the appellant to make complaints against the respondent and poisoned against the respondent since day one.
- Evidence from the Good Shepherd International School, including progress reports and certificates, showcase the child’s academic achievements and participation in co-curricular activities.
- The child has actively participated in competitions, winning prizes and certificates, demonstrating her talent and engagement in school activities.
Analysis
- The High Court considered the father’s request to admit the child in a reputed school, Good Shepherd International School, Ooty for Class V, affiliated to ICSE.
- The session for 2018-2019 commences from 21.07.2018, ensuring the girl does not lose any valuable period of the session.
- The decision was based on the totality of facts and circumstances presented in the case.
- The aim was to provide the child with a better educational atmosphere free from stress and tension for improved future prospects.
- The child, Aditi, was ultimately admitted to Good Shepherd International School, Ooty, albeit reluctantly by the appellant after the High Court’s order on 26.04.2018.
- It is the welfare of the minor and of the minor alone which is the paramount consideration.
- The welfare of the child is of paramount importance while deciding on custody or other issues concerning the child.
- An unhealthy environment in a broken home, due to tension between parents, can seriously affect the healthy growth of a child necessitating the child to be removed for their welfare.
- The court’s duty is to consider the welfare of the child in any matter concerning a minor.
- The custody of the father may be refused if it does not promote the welfare of the children.
- The embittered relationship between parents can have a disastrous effect on the child, especially if one parent poisons the child’s mind against the other.
- The Court’s paramount concern is the welfare of the child when determining custody.
- Every child has the right to proper health and education, and it is the duty of parents to ensure this.
- The court must prioritize the welfare of the child over the rights of the parents when deciding on custody.
- The term ‘Parental Alienation Syndrome’ refers to the harmful effects on a child placed in the middle of loyalty conflicts between parents.
- The High Court judgment is upheld.
- No valid grounds for interference with the judgment.
- The decision is supported based on the foregoing discussion.
Also Read: Dispensation with Personal Appearance in Criminal Case: Landmark Judgement by Supreme Court of India
Decision
- The Principal of the school submitted an interim report of the academic session in a sealed cover before the Court.
- The High Court is requested to decide First Appeal No.59 of 2016 and First Appeal No.68 of 2016 after hearing the parties.
- The Court has made certain observations to be kept in view during the decision-making process of the appeals.
- I.A. is disposed of, and all the reports in sealed covers are to be transmitted to the Jharkhand High Court by a special Messenger for consideration in the pending first appeals.
- The appeals are disposed of accordingly based on the reports submitted.
- Reports are required to be submitted within two weeks.
Case Title: SHEOLI HATI Vs. SOMNATH DAS
Case Number: C.A. No.-005388-005389 / 2019
