Custody applications should not be left pending by the courts for years, not only because the children could suffer during that time in the care of the wrong person, but also because such a delay could cause them to come of age and thereby frustrate the objective behind being appealed to the Guardians and Wards Act 1890, said the Madras Supreme Court.
Judges SM Subramaniam and J. Sathya Narayana Prasad made the observations while allowing an appeal, favored by a female police officer who was seeking custody of her two daughters, aged 16 and 10. The division bank found that the woman had filed a custody petition in 2016, a single court judge had only dismissed it on April 8 of that year.
The board also disapproved of the practice of deciding such petitions solely on the basis of the estranged couple’s briefs and without even questioning the minor children. In the present case, it found that the police officer had married a junior assistant from the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board in 2002. The couple had two children, one in 2006 and another in 2010.
After that, they divorced amicably. Although a restraining order was issued in the custody application, allowing the officer to visit her children at weekends, she claimed the order was not complied with by her ex-husband. However, when the custody request was brought to the final hearing, the single judge dismissed it.
The applicant challenged the order, alleging that her ex-husband abused her by exploiting his political connections, even though she served in the police force. She said she was forcibly held in a rehabilitation center for the mentally handicapped for two days.
She also told the bank that her ex-husband did not take good care of their children and they lived at his sister’s house. When the judges summoned the children, their father was reluctant to lead them into court, and just as the children were climbing the steps to reach the dais, they collapsed in front of the two judges.
The children expressed their reluctance to live with their father because they had been physically abused by him and wanted to live with their mother, and the judges let them go with her. Since the applicant, as a working woman, was able to care for her children, the judges even refused the father’s visitation rights.
They also granted the applicant freedom to turn to the competent police if her ex-husband violated the court order.
Comments are closed.