(Image source from: scroll.in)

The Delhi high court has granted the custody of a 10- year old boy to his father who is a Non- resident Indian and an industrialist living in Kenya as it has been said that the man was in a better position for taking care of the child.

It has also been observed by the bench of Justice G S Sistani and Justice Jyoti Singh that although the woman who is said to be an advocate practicing in the Delhi High Court may be well within her rights for seeking the alimony from her husband as she has made use of the minor as a “chattel to be traded for alimony or the other benefits can never be in the best interests of the child.”

An appeal which has been filed by the high court has bee dismissed by the high court where the appeal was challenging an order of the trail court by which the custody of the child has been granted to his father.

“We are of the view that the father/ respondent is in a better position to take care of the child and the best interests of the child would be protected by granting his custody to the father. Accordingly, we find no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed,” as said by the high court as it has dismissed the appeal that has been filed by the woman.

It has been said by the High Court that the Supreme Court has reiterated time and again that while making the decision as to which parent would be getting the custody of the minor, paramount consideration has to be given to the ‘welfare of the child’ and also to the ‘best interest’ principle.

The court has been hearing an appeal that has been made by the mother where in it was challenging an order made by a family court in the month of January of 2018, granting the guardianship of the child to his father and has directed the mother to hand over the custody of the boy to the man at the end of the academic session of the years 2017-2018.

The couple has got married in the month of July in the year 2007 and their son was born in the month of December of the year 2009. It has been said that the woman has come to along with her child after she has been facing problems with her husband, in the year 2012.

The woman had alleged that the father of the child was unfit to be granted the custody of the child as he has been habituated to drinking alcohol and that he was racist and that he was not interested in the child before the commencement of the litigation has been done.

The woman has said that the father of the child was a busy businessman who travels for days in a month and that he had also wanted to entrust the custody of the child to the paternal grandparents who are old aged and they would not be able to bring up the minor.

The man has however alleged that the woman has been trying to isolate the child from him and also from the members of his family and that she has been telling their son about demons in Kenya and there might be a plane crash during his flight to stop him from travelling to Kenya.

The man has said that he has his family were highly NRI industrialists with being interested to spread their business over Kenya and the United Kingdom and that the child would be the heir of their business and that he has to be exposed to the business environment from a young age.

He has also mentioned that the woman who is an advocate by profession lives in an accommodation which is small and that she lives along with he old mother.

The high court has said in its order that the man has been holding a dual citizenship of Kenya and the United Kingdom and that the business interest of the man and his family was to spread in both the countries of Kenya and also in the United Kingdom.

The order of the high court has mentioned that both the woman and her mother are not working and are staying at home and are reaping the rental income and that they would not be an ideal role model for the child. The order has also said that although financial superiority can never be the sole ground for granting the custody, however it can also be one among the factors that has to be considered while ascertaining where the welfare of the minor in all the aspects lies.

By Shrithika Kushangi