Welfare of child paramount in deciding custody: Apex court

NEW DELHI - The Supreme Court Tuesday held that the “welfare of the minor” and not the statutory rights of the parents or the relatives was paramount in deciding the custody of the child.

The welfare of the child must be taken in its widest sense, said an apex court bench of Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice B.S.Chauhan in their judgment granting custody of Vishwajeet to his maternal grandfather Shyamrao Maroti Korwate.

Writing the judgment for the bench, Justice Sathasivam said that “it is true that under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, the father is the guardian of the minor child until he is found unfit to be a guardian of the minor”.

However, the judgment said that the “welfare of the minor child is the paramount consideration and such a question cannot be decided merely on the basis of the rights of the parties under the law”.

Modifying the orders of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, the apex court judgment restored the custody of Vishwajeet, also known as Sangharsh, to his maternal grandfather till he turned 12.

On the visitation rights of the father, Deepak Kishanrao Tekam, the court said that during long holidays/vacations more than two weeks long, the child would be allowed to be with the father for seven days.

This one week period shall be fixed by Tekam after due intimation to the maternal grandfather, who shall permit the child to go with him for the period.

In addition to this, Tekam would get to meet Vishwajeet twice a month, preferably on Saturday or Sunday or on a festival day.

All the investments in the name of the child would be deposited in fixed deposit in a public sector bank and neither the principal nor the interest thereon could be touched without the approval of the district judge of Yavatmal in Maharashtra, the court said.

The court also permitted the father to provide facilities such as payment of school fees, books, dress material and eatables, among others, during this period to develop a conducive relationship with the child.

Tekam married Kaveri June 3, 2002. On March 23, 2003, she gave birth to a son, Vishwajeet, but passed away due to excessive bleeding during childbirth.

Within an year of Kaveri’s death, Tekam married again and had a son from his second wife.

Vishwajeet’s maternal grandfather moved the court of the district judge for the custody of the child under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

The district judge ruled in favour of the maternal grandfather and gave him the custody of the child but the decision was reversed by a single judge of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court.