Today, the Delhi High Court allowed a Ukrainian mother to return home with her son, affirming a decision against the father’s guardianship petition. The couple’s dispute arose when the father brought the child to India against a Ukrainian court order.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
DELHI: Today(on 19th March), The Delhi High Court made a landmark decision allowing a Ukrainian woman to return to her homeland with her young son. A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Amit Bansal delivered the verdict, affirming the decision of the family court which had earlier dismissed the guardianship petition filed by the child’s father, Akhilesh Kumar Gupta, citing lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Akhilesh Kumar Gupta and his ex-wife, Gupta Snizhana Grygorivna, were married and subsequently divorced in Ukraine, where their two children were born. This contention began when Gupta brought the younger child to India, defying a Ukrainian court order.
The Delhi High Court, in its judgment, emphasized the wrongful act of the father in bringing the child to India against the Ukrainian court’s directive.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court: Elder Sister’s Guardianship Depends on Courts, Not Writ Petition
The court stated:
“Considering the merits of the case, we believe it is not in the best interest of the minor child, presently five years old, to be separated from his mother (respondent no.1) and his elder sister, who reside in Vinnytsia, Ukraine.”
This statement highlights the court’s consideration of the child’s best interests, which is a fundamental principle in custody disputes.
Additionally, the judgment disclosed that the family court directly interacted with the minor child, who clearly expressed a desire to return to Ukraine with his mother, showing a reluctance to communicate with the appellant and his family members. This interaction significantly influenced the court’s decision-making process.
The High Court also took into account the financial constraints faced by the mother in India, which would adversely affect the child’s well-being. Aligning with international legal standards, the judgment referenced Article 9(1) and Article 10(2) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, reinforcing the importance of maintaining the usual place of residence and the rights of children and parents to return to their own country.
ALSO READ: Gujarat High Court Verdict: Guardians Cannot Make Wills for Mentally Ill
The court noted-
“Consistent with the aforementioned articles, we are of the opinion that the usual place of residence of the child is Vinnytsia, Ukraine.”
Addressing concerns about the safety of Vinnytsia, the court clarified that advisories issued by the Indian government for its nationals did not apply to the Ukrainian mother and her son, paving the way for their return to Ukraine.
CASE TITLE: Akhilesh Kumar Gupta v. Ms Gupta Snizhana Grygorivna & Ors
READ THE ORDER
