Battle for child custody resolved through affection, not legal battles: Anantnag court grants father visitation rights
In a significant ruling on July 31, 2022, the Anantnag District Court, under Judge Tahir Khurshid Raina, emphasized the importance of a child's welfare and will in custody disputes. The case in question involved a 10-year-old boy who had expressed a clear and consistent refusal to meet his estranged father.
Advocate Shahi-dul-Aslam represented the child's father, while Advocate Numan Jhangir represented the child's mother. The father had also sought directions to change the school where the child was studying.
The court dismissed the petitions filed by the father seeking enforcement of custody and visitation rights. The judge urged the father to win the child's affection through patience, unconditional love, and rebuilding the relationship, rather than relying on litigation.
The ruling reaffirmed that custody disputes are human issues rather than mere legal rights to be mechanically enforced. The court invoked its jurisdiction under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and emphasized that a child is not property or a commodity. Courts must apply a "human touch" in such matters.
The court noted that the mother was still trying to persuade her son to meet his father, despite his refusal to even recognize him. However, the court also encouraged the father to share responsibility and contribute positively to the child's environment.
The ruling cited the Supreme Court precedent in Nil Ratan Kundu v. Abhijit Kundu, underscoring that the welfare and will of the child take precedence over legal rights or enforcement of visitation orders. The court cannot force a child to meet or go with a parent against their will, and attempting to do so amounts to emotional torture and contradicts the purpose of custody laws.
Overall, the court’s stance highlights that child-centric approaches supersede rigid enforcement of visitation rights when the child expresses a clear preference. This aligns with the doctrine of parens patriae, where the court acts in the best interest of the child.
The court's ruling sets a precedent that while parents have legal rights for custody or visitation, those rights do not permit courts to compel a child’s participation against their express wishes. Courts should balance legal orders with emotional and psychological welfare, prioritizing the child's voice and comfort over procedural enforcement.
The court also made an appreciative note of the mother's efforts in single parenting and urged the father to share his own responsibility. The court advised the father to show unilateral, unconditional, un-annoying, and un-disturbing love and care towards his son, growing in his mother's custody. The court urged the mother to ensure that her assurances for the child to meet his father translate into genuine efforts.
The court's ruling underscores the importance of prioritizing a child's welfare and will in custody disputes, emphasizing that a child's emotional well-being should not be compromised for the sake of legal rights or procedures.
- In the light of the Anantnag District Court's ruling, it is crucial for estranged parents to prioritize their child's emotional well-being and family dynamics, focusing on personal growth and rebuilding relationships rather than relying on legal enforcement.
- The court's decision also underscores the significance of education and self-development, as it encourages parents to contribute positively to their child's environment and ensure their general news and well-being are taken care of.
- Moreover, the ruling serves as a reminder that a child's lifestyle should not be dictated by legal rights or procedures; instead, it should be guided by the child's preferences, aligning with the doctrine of parens patriae, where the court acts in the best interest of the child.
