Child's Preference For Parent Alone Can't Decide Custody Case: High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that any decision on which parent a child should live with cannot be determined solely based on the child's preference for a particular parent. The main considerations are the child's best interest and welfare, the high court said as it gave the custody of a 12-year-old child to his mother.

A division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh gave the verdict on August 20. The child's father, Abhishek Singh, had challenged an order dated July 2020 passed by a family court in Shahdol. The family court had rejected his petition to transfer the child's custody from the mother, Annanya aka Priya Singh, to his care.

Abhishek Singh said the child was 12 years old and capable of expressing his own wishes. He alleged the mother had taken the child from Shahdol to Uttar Pradesh's Ghaziabad, affecting his visitation rights.

In her reply, the woman said the child was going to a school in Ghaziabad and was receiving proper care and schooling under her supervision. The court was told that Abhishek Singh had remarried and despite a high court order in December 2021, he made no attempt to visit the child in Ghaziabad.

The high court said the welfare of the child is paramount in custody matters and that while a child's preference is significant, it cannot serve as the sole basis for determining custody.

The court held that at this crucial stage of the child's age and development, the mother's care, guidance, education and emotional support were vital to his best interests. The court also cited Supreme Court judgements in the cases of Vivek Singh vs Romani Singh, and Ruchi Majoo vs Sanjeev Majoo.

While retaining custody with the mother, the court also established visitation arrangements for the father. He would be allowed to meet the child in Shahdol every working Saturday. Additionally, a video call has been scheduled every Sunday between 8 and 8.30 pm.

The mother is required to share her mobile number with the father; however, a condition has been imposed that the father must not engage in abusive language or any form of misconduct.

Any violation could result in the suspension of the video calls. Both may seek modifications to the visitation arrangement from the trial court if the need arises. With these directions, the high court disposed of the appeal.