The father's remarriage cannot face children's custody. Grandparents cannot have a better claim than him: SC

The Supreme Court ruled that the father's remarriage cannot stand against custody against the claim to custody and grandparents cannot have a better claim than the father who is the nature conservation.

The complainant, father of a minor child, attacked the order of the written court in a Habeas Corpus lettering application, which contested the child's custody, which was with his grandchildren after the death of his mother.

The department bank from Justice Br Gavai and Justice K.Vinod Chandran claimed: “The father, the nature conservation, we repeat, is well busy and educated and there is nothing against its legal rights; As a natural legal guardian and legitimate wish to have custody for his child. “

Aor Nishant Verma represented the complainant, while Aor Arup Banerjee represented the respondents.

Previous procedures

The individual judge, who sparked the written petition, interacted with the child, who indicated that he lived his training in his grandfather's house comfortably. It was also noticed that the father was married again. Based on the knowledge mentioned above, it was founded that the well -being of the minor child would be served by continued with his grandfather. The father was granted the right to visit to meet the child on the first day of each month regularly at the event location of the court official of the court.

argumentation

The bank found that the father of the grandparents, who also took care of the child with the help of the mother's siblings, looked for the child for the child. The grandfather also initiated a procedure for maintenance and called for RS. 20,000 per month for the child. This made the position clear that the grandparents were unable to maintain the child himself.

“The father is a trained person and has a responsible position that was appointed to the administrative services of the state. Although the father is married again, it cannot stand against custody against custody; In particular, otherwise a question would have been asked how the child would be looked after; The father who is busy with his work, ”said the bank.

When the bank observed the fact that the only judge had not tried to relieve the child's attitude towards his father, he also found that the child was with his parents for about 10 years after he was born until he Mother died. “He was separated by the father in 2021 and lived with his grandparents, who cannot have a better claim than the father who is the nature conservation guard. There is no claim of a marital argument when the child's mother lived, a complaint about abuse against the woman or son, said the bank.

“We believe that the child's well -being is best served under the facts and circumstances of this case if the custody is given to the father,” added.

In view of the fact that the child has not had the father's society for more than three years, the child is now among the grandparents and his academic year is the bank, the child in the grandfather's care until April 30, 2025 .

When the complainant was able to take his child in his house on alternative weekends, the bank ordered: “This agreement will be continued up to 30.04.2025 until the child's custody is handed over to the father. on May 1st, 2025 in the presence of the court official of jurisdiction. The grandparents also have visiting rights that have been imprisoned after imprisonment, and they can bring the child into their apartment every weekend on which the second Saturday from June 2025 falls. Which agreement takes one year and then according to the child's wish. “

Cause Title: Vivek Kumar CHARBVEDI & ARG. v. Condition of Up & Ors. (Neutral quote: 2025 Inc 159)

Look:

Applicant: Aor Nishant Verma, supporter Gopal Jha, Amitabh Ranjan, Samiksha Sharma, Jitendra Kumar Singh

Inquiries: Aor Arup Banerjee, supporter Amitabh Poddar, Priyanshu Raj, Prakash Sharma, Rajiv Agnihotri, Anjali Mishra, Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Saurabh Singh Singhachan, Deveshi Chau or Sarojijise Tripathi or Sarojijise Tripathi

Click here to read/download the judgment: