Sunday 1 September 2024

Bombay HC: Mere desire of a child at a tender age is not a sole factor to be considered for deciding child custody

In view of the above, now it is settled that it is the

interest of the children that needs to be considered. Mere desire

of a child at a tender age is not a sole factor to be considered for

taking decision in respect of the custody. The child at the tender

age is not fully aware of his welfare. There is always tendency to

be with parent with whom they are residing. They are mostly

influenced by tutoring by the parents. Interaction with child is

thus influenced by such parents. In the present case also, this

court interacted with the children. The children naturally stated

that they are happy with the father. However, it must be

considered that presently children are in custody of the father

and as expected, answer has come in favour of the father. 

{Para 12}

13. So far as better company and care is concerned, it is

seen that almost every member in the family of the husband is

occupied in the business. There is only grand-mother of the

children who is in the house for whole day. In the house of the

wife, she is always at home. She stays with her parents. There

are other relatives in the family. So far as deprivation of the

company is concerned, it needs to be noted that both the parties

are staying in the same town. Distance between the houses of

husband and wife is not more than 2 km. Thus, visitation by

parent would not be much difficult. Husband can always meet

children at convenient place. Husband and wife are related to

each other even prior to marriage. One more factor needs to be

considered is that there is one female child who is staying with

mother. If all the siblings stay together it would help children in

growing together. Being female child she requires care and

attention of the mother. Under Muslim Law, custody of the

children below 7 years is required to be with the wife.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1708 OF 2024 WITH CA/7330/2024 IN FA/1708/2024

Mukhtar S/o. Yunus Sayyad, Vs  Habiba W/o. Mukhtar Sayyad,

CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

PRONOUNCED ON : 28th AUGUST, 2024


1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and

order passed by the learned District Judge, Aurangabad dated

09-05-2024 in Civil Misc. Application No. 364/2022 directing

the present appellant-original respondent No.1 to hand over the

custody of children to present respondent No.1. Present

appellant is the husband-original respondent No.1 in Civil Misc.

Application No.364/2022. Present respondent No.1 is the

original petitioner in the said application. Present respondent

Nos. 2 to 7 are original respondent Nos. 2 to 7, who are parents,

brothers and family members of the appellant husband.

2. The appellant is referred to as ‘husband’ and

respondent No.1 is referred to as ‘wife’ and respondent Nos.2 to

7 are referred to as ‘relatives’ for the purpose of convenience.

3. The wife filed an application under Section 25 of the

Guardians and Wards Act, 1980 for custody of the minor

children from the husband.

4. The case in short, is that the husband and wife got

married on 24-04-2015 as per Muslim rites. There are two sons

namely Sayyad Mohammad who was 5 years of age and Sayyad

Sarmad who was 2 years of age at the time of filing application

and one daughter namely Fatima born out of said marriage. It is

the case of the wife that after the marriage she was staying in a

joint family. After few days of the marriage, she was ill-treated at

the hands of in-laws for demand of Rs.1.50,000/- for opening

imitation jewelry shop. The wife therefore was constrained to

file to lodge a First Information Report with Pachod Police

Station for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 504,

506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. On the basis of FIR, Crime

No. 297/2022 was registered. Same is pending. Since she was

driven out of the house, she had filed proceeding under Section

97 of the Cr. P. C. seeking custody of the minor children. Both

the proceedings are pending before the learned trial court. The

wife thereafter filed Misc. Application No. 364/2022 for custody

of children being natural guardian of the children. It is her case

that she is in a position to take care of the children. She can look

after their education up bringing of the child etc.

5. It is the case of the husband and relatives that

financial condition of the family and husband is sound.

Allegations about ill-treatment and harassment are denied.

Specific incident dated 27-07-2022, is denied i.e. driving out of

the wife from house. The children are taking good education

and they are looked after by the family. The children show good

progress in the school. Though there were attempts on the part

of the husband to call the wife for cohabitation, it is the wife

who did not come for cohabitation. The husband is also a

natural guardian.

6. However, there was no evidence laid by the

husband’s side. The court therefore, decided the application

directing the parties to give custody of the children to the wife.

The husband challenged the order before this court. This court

remanded the application with direction to give opportunity to

the husband to adduce evidence. It is, thereafter, main

application again came to be decided after taking evidence. It is

this order, which is now under challenge. In the impugned

judgment and order, the learned trial court observed that wife

can take best care of the children. Minor children need company

of the mother. It is the mother who can take proper care of the

children by paying attention. She has sufficient time for children

as she is a housewife and not involved in any business. As

against that husband is busy with his grocery shop and does not

have time to look after the children. It has come on record that

there was also a notice for ‘restitution of conjugal rights’.

However, there was no reply. It is observed on the basis of

evidence that husband runs grocery shop etc and directed the

custody of children to be handed over to the wife.

7. This court has gone through the record and

proceedings and evidence in the matter. This court also

interacted with the children to access their situation and to ask

their willingness. The children presently are in the custody of

the husband and thus very naturally they stated they are happy

with the father and they do not want to go with the mother.

8. Learned advocate for the appellant vehemently

argued the appeal. He submits that observations of the court are

against facts on record. It is the father who can take decision in

the interest of the children. The wife is educated only up to 8th

std. whereas husband is educated up to BA. His grocery shop

business is flourishing one. His brother is also having tea-stall.

His another brother runs a footwear shop near bus-stand.

However, this evidence is ignored by the learned court. Children

are taking education in a reputed school namely Jain English

School at Pachod. Progress report of children in school is not

properly appreciated. He relied upon compilation of the

documents produced on record to show that son Mohammad &

Sarmad are taking education in Gurukul English School. In spite

of issuance of notice, wife has not come for co-habitation.

Though the wife has left the house on 27-07-2022, no attempts

were made for seeking custody. The custody was sought much

time after leaving the house. Even the children do not want to

go to reside with the mother. There are many people residing in

the house of the parents of the wife because of this mother

would not in position to take care of children. Now the children

are settled in the husband’s house. Learned advocate for the

appellant relied upon the judgment reported in 2024 SCC

Online SC 225 in the case of Shazia Aman Khan and Another Vs

State of Orissa and others.

9. As against that Mr. Sayyed, learned advocate for the

respondents submits that there is no female member in the

family of the husband to look after the children. Financial

condition is not sole criteria while considering the matter of

grant of custody of minor children. The learned trial court has

rightly observed, on the basis of evidence, that the children are

found vulnerable to tutoring and developing general negativity.

Children are only of 5 years & 2 years requiring company of the

mother. He relied upon the judgment reported in 2022 LiveLaw

(SC) 643 RohithThammana Gowda Vs State of Karnataka and

Ors.

10. In the case of Shazia Aman Khan (supra) the Hon’ble

Apex Court has considered the concept of custody, guardianship

and stability of child. It is held that the court has to look at

stability and security of the child as essential for full

development of child’s talent and personality. It is reiterated that

paramount consideration in the matter of custody is welfare of

the children. It is further held that while deciding the matters of

custody, wish of the children is also one of the factors that

requires consideration. In that case, child was called to the court

for interaction. Parents were also called for interaction. In that

case, court found that child was quite intelligent who could

understand her welfare. In that case, child expressed that she

does not want to be destabilize. Thus, from the interaction with

the child the Hon’ble Apex Court had decided not to disturb the

custody of the child.

11. So far as judgment in the case of Rohith Thammana

Gowda (supra) is concerned, the Hon’ble Apex Court directed to

give custody to the mother as it was satisfied that the child was

comfortable and secure with his mother. The order directing to

give custody to the mother was maintained. In the case reported

in AIR 1988 Kerala 30 Suharabi Vs Muhammed the Kerla High

Court directed to hand over custody to the mother by setting

aside the judgment and order of the learned District Judge. It

was considered that the children were of tender age and it was

in the interest of children to be in the custody of the mother. In

Writ Petition No. 2048/2023 Abhishek Ajit Chavan Vs Dr. Gauri

Abhishek Chavan this court at Bombay, on considering various


factors, interacted with the child in the chamber. Though the

child expressed her desire to be with her father, this court held

that the comfort of the child is one of the factors to be taken into

consideration while considering the welfare of the child. It was

considered that child was of 8 years of age. Child at the age of 8

years would normally be driven by her immediate comfort. The

court after considering the family position of the parties & that

mother was only having part time job and thus would be in the

house for most of the time in a day, dismissed the petition of the

husband.

12. In view of the above, now it is settled that it is the

interest of the children that needs to be considered. Mere desire

of a child at a tender age is not a sole factor to be considered for

taking decision in respect of the custody. The child at the tender

age is not fully aware of his welfare. There is always tendency to

be with parent with whom they are residing. They are mostly

influenced by tutoring by the parents. Interaction with child is

thus influenced by such parents. In the present case also, this

court interacted with the children. The children naturally stated

that they are happy with the father. However, it must be

considered that presently children are in custody of the father

and as expected, answer has come in favour of the father.

13. So far as better company and care is concerned, it is

seen that almost every member in the family of the husband is

occupied in the business. There is only grand-mother of the

children who is in the house for whole day. In the house of the

wife, she is always at home. She stays with her parents. There

are other relatives in the family. So far as deprivation of the

company is concerned, it needs to be noted that both the parties

are staying in the same town. Distance between the houses of

husband and wife is not more than 2 km. Thus, visitation by

parent would not be much difficult. Husband can always meet

children at convenient place. Husband and wife are related to

each other even prior to marriage. One more factor needs to be

considered is that there is one female child who is staying with

mother. If all the siblings stay together it would help children in

growing together. Being female child she requires care and

attention of the mother. Under Muslim Law, custody of the

children below 7 years is required to be with the wife.

14. So far as financial condition is concerned, the court

has rightly taken care of that aspect directing husband to pay an

amount per month to each children. [In the order it, however

wrongly appears that wife is directed to pay]

15. This court finds that the learned trial court has

considered all the evidence and has rightly arrived at the

conclusion. No case is made out to disturb the said findings of

fact. Thus in view of the discussion above, this court finds that

there is no merit in the appeal and appeal deserves to be

dismissed. The learned trial court had directed custody to be

handed over within a period of one month from the date of

judgment, however, that period is now over. Therefore, this

order to take effect within one month from today. Rest of the

order is maintained as it is. The husband is directed to pay an

amount per month by correcting the order of the learned trial

court as discussed in para No.14 of this judgment.

16. In view of above, appeal stands dismissed off.

17. In view of disposal of the appeal, the civil

applications, if any stand disposed off.

 [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]

LATER ON:

1. At this stage the learned advocate for the appellant

seeks continuation of the interim order.

2. The request is vehemently opposed by the learned

advocate for the respondent. He submits that during the

pendency of the application, she was not allowed to see the

children by the husband.


3. In view of the same, following arrangement:

(i) Stay continued for next four weeks.

(ii) The interim arrangement to continue till next

four weeks, by way of interim arrangement. For next

four weeks, the wife is allowed to see the children at

the house of the husband by way of interim

arrangement and to take the children on every

Saturday After school time is over and she will send

back the children on every Monday in the morning

for school purpose to husband.

 [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]


Print Page

No comments:

Post a Comment