Whether Husband can be denied custody of child merely because husband was seen with a lady?

Don’t poison kids’ minds, HC says, allows dad access to girls

MUMBAI: The Family court in Bandra made Diwali doubly bright for a city industrialist this year after granting him a seven-day overnight access to his two little daughters but not before admonishing the "elite class" south Mumbai couple, battling a divorce case for three years, for having "no value for justice at their doorstep" and wondering if their case could be transferred to "remote Nagpur" to teach a lesson. 

Judge I M Bohari who granted the access, observed that the couple, both highly qualified—he has a management degree from Jamnalal Bajaj and a US university, she has a masters in dental surgery from Nair hospital—were "indulging in mud slinging not just against each other but also against judges". The judge wondered "if Chief Justice of the Bombay high court could be requested to transfer the case to a remote place like Nagpur so that the husband and wife will learn the value of justice from the suffering." 

The case had already traversed within the family court to five different judges and Bombay high court. Its chequered history also prompted Judge Bohari to question the court's permission for lawyers to appear in family court matters. Section 13 of the Family Courts Act,1984 allows the party to be represented by a lawyer, subject to permission of the Family Court and not as of right, he said adding, "If legal practitioners indulge in multiplying court proceedings and making litigation complex, it may be necessary to disallow them from representing the parties." This case "would be the best example," the judge said. The husband is a director of a pharmaceutical company and the wife a dentist and entrepreuner. "The point" said the judge, was "whether such litigants should be allowed to get represented through a legal practitioner when they are so highly qualified." Lawyers have to stand by the salutary object of the Family Courts Act, he said on October 16 while hearing afresh the father's access plea for either a seven-day Goa holiday or 10 am to 8 pm access in Mumbai where he stays at Altamount Road. The wife, the custodial parent, objected to the daughters' going to Goa alone with the father who she had accused of having an extra-marital affair. She wanted to be taken to Goa too, to supervise. 

The children deserve love and affection of their non-custodial parent and grandparents too, the judge said. "Merely because, the husband was seen with a lady, he cannot be branded a pervert. If the wife wants the court to believe her allegations against her husband, the court will have to look into his allegations that she suffers from paranoia and mental disorder. But were it really true, she wouldn't have been allowed to practice at 22 different clinics," the judge said. The court asked both parents "not to poison the minds" of the 10 and 6-year-old children against each other and to "allow them to enjoy their childhood". The judge finally allowed the father to take his girls to Goa for a vacation, but with his mother-in-law in tow so that the daughters can spend the night with her. 

Print Page