Home > Recent Judgements > Family Court Optimal For Child Custody : Supreme Court
Sept 10, 2024
FAMILY COURT OPTIMAL FOR CHILD CUSTODY : SUPREME COURT
The Supreme Court of India recently in Somprabha Rana & Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., rendered a pivotal judgment, emphasizing the superiority of Regular Civil Courts or Family Courts over Writ Courts in adjudicating child custody disputes. This ruling arose in the context of a High Court’s decision to disrupt the custody of a toddler through a writ proceeding.
CONTEXT AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK
The Supreme Court took issue with the High Court’s decision to alter the custody arrangement of a toddler under writ jurisdiction. The Court clarified that child custody and guardianship matters should be addressed under substantive legal proceedings, specifically those governed by the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 (GW Act). This legal framework provides a comprehensive approach to custody disputes, emphasizing the paramount importance of the child’s welfare which cannot be fully assessed within the limited scope of writ jurisdiction.
CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS: THE SUPERIOR FORUM FOR CHILD CUSTODY DISPUTES
The Supreme Court highlighted several reasons why Civil and Family Courts are better suited for child custody matters. These courts enable direct and frequent interaction with the child, allowing the judiciary to assess the child’s emotional state and overall well-being. Family Courts foster a comfortable setting for such interactions as they are equipped with child-friendly environments. Moreover, these courts can regulate parental access in a controlled and supervised manner, minimizing potential harm to the child. Unlike Writ Courts, Civil and Family Courts also have the authority to record evidence and involve experts ensuring decisions are legally sound and in the best interest of child. Additionally, they can continuously monitor visitation arrangements to safeguard the child’s welfare.
THE ROLE OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CHILD CUSTODY
The Supreme Court clarified that the writ of habeas corpus is an extraordinary remedy but has significant limitations in child custody cases. It is a discretionary prerogative writ which is reserved for exceptional circumstances and is not a substitute for substantive proceedings under the Guardianship and Wards Act (GW Act). The High Court holds the discretion to refuse writ jurisdiction even where custody is deemed illegal, if such intervention would not serve the child’s welfare. The child’s well-being must always be the paramount consideration, outweighing any legal rights of the parties involved. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that custody decisions must be based on humanitarian considerations, adhering to the doctrine of parents patriae. The child should never be treated as mere property and the judiciary must act with compassion and in the best interests of the minor.
KEY INSIGHTS
The Supreme Court’s ruling firmly establishes that Regular Civil and Family Courts are the appropriate forums for adjudicating child custody disputes. By highlighting the procedural advantages, including child-centred environments, expert involvement and continuous oversight, the Court reaffirms that the welfare of the child must always be the focal point in such cases. Writ jurisdiction is unsuitable for the complexities of custody disputes as the child’s best interests require a more substantive and holistic approach.
For more information or queries, please email us at
[email protected]
