Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Since there was no order passed by any court for handing over the custody of the child to the father, so custody of the minor child at this tender age by the father cannot be considered as legal.
“While considering the claim for custody of a minor child, unless very serious, proven conduct should make one of them unworthy to claim for custody of the child concerned, the question can and shall be decided solely by looking into the question as to, ‘what would be the best interest of the child concerned.”
“The writ of habeas corpus is a prerogative writ, an extraordinary remedy, evolved under the common law and incorporated in our constitutional law, having the objective to protect and safeguard individual liberty.”
Madras High Court pointed out that at this juncture that the minor child had been under the grandparents’ care since birth, which was disturbed due to the strained relationship between the parties.
Delhi High Court issued a mandatory reminder, rather than a gentle reminder that it is essential to emphasise that in cases involving offences of serious nature, particularly those falling under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, no form of mediation is permissible.
“If the intent of the appellant is to get the child admitted in Venkateshwar International School, Dwarka, the said school has a branch in Rohini and the respondent is agreeable if the appellant can ensure the admission of the minor child in the said school at Rohini.”
Supreme Court said that the repeated visitation rights in the Court premises would also not be in the interest of the child as the environment during which the visitation rights are exercised would also matter.
The primary object of a Habeas Corpus petition, as applied to minor children, is to determine in whose custody the best interests of the child will probably be advanced.
The Patna High Court observed that the daughter wanted to reside with her brother and father and was not comfortable in staying with her mother, thus, the Court upheld the Family Court’s decision of giving the daughter’s custody to her father.
Supreme Court: The bench of AM Khanwilkar and JB Pardiwala*, JJ, in a matter relating to custody of two minor children, has
“One should not doubt the capacity and/or ability of the paternal grandparents to take care of their grandson.”
Delhi High Court: Upholding the rights of the putative father, V. Kameswar Rao, J., expressed that while determining and granting such rights,
Love and affection of both parents is considered to be the basic human right of a child.
The information provided by the State Governments/Union Territories on the ‘Bal Swaraj’ Portal upto 05.06.2021 shows that there are 30,071 children who have become orphans or have lost one parent or abandoned.
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of A.S. Chandurkar and N.B. Suryawanshi, JJ., determined the factors in regard to grant of custody of
Supreme Court: In the issue relating to custody of a child where the question was as to whether the Counsellor’s report furnished
Singapore High Court (Family Division): A Three-Judge Bench comprising of Sundaresh Menon, CJ., Judith Prakash, JA., and Debbie Ong, J., allowed an
Supreme Court: Setting aside the Delhi High Court order where a father was directed to hand over the custody of his 5-year-old