The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody
of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine
the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial
disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and
Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and
posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.
The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.
Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi
High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US
citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that
country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting
aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.
However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help
of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India,
following which the woman moved the apex court. (
Custody battle: A child's wait for justice)
In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising,
on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for
early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance
involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial
disputes involving people of Indian origin.
Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law
officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in
private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.
Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.
However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench
that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of
wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed
out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to
come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not
available in other countries. The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody
of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine
the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial
disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.
A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and
Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and
posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.
The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.
Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi
High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US
citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that
country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting
aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.
However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help
of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India,
following which the woman moved the apex court.
In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising,
on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for
early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance
involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial
disputes involving people of Indian origin.
Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law
officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in
private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.
Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.
However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench
that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of
wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed
out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to
come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not
available in other countries.
