Supreme Court has granted custody to the girl’s aunt, emphasizing that a child cannot be treated as a “chattel.”. The legal battle for the young girl’s custody was between her biological father and her aunt.
The Supreme Court of India has made a significant decision regarding the custody of a 14-year-old girl. The apex court’s ruling, which set aside the Orissa High Court’s decision, has granted custody to the girl’s aunt, emphasizing that a child cannot be treated as a “chattel.”
Also Read- Supreme Court’s Stance On Relationship Changes: Refuses To Quash Rape Case (lawchakra.in)
The legal battle for the young girl’s custody was between her biological father and her aunt. The Supreme Court, in its wisdom, decided in favor of the aunt, highlighting several critical factors that contribute to the welfare of the child, which is of paramount importance.
The bench, comprising Justices CT Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, made poignant observations regarding the case. They noted,
“she cannot be treated as a ‘chattel’ at the age of 14 years,”
and
“stability of the child is also of paramount consideration.”
This statement reflects the court’s modern approach towards child custody, recognizing the child’s individual rights and needs over traditional claims based on biological relationships.
The justices further elaborated on their decision, pointing out that the girl had never lived with her biological father since birth. This fact played a significant role in their judgment, as the court prioritized the child’s current and ongoing welfare and stability over the mere biological connection with the father.
The Supreme Court’s decision was also influenced by the girl’s own wishes. The bench stated,
“Keeping in view her age at present, she is capable of forming an opinion in that regard. She was quite categoric in that regard when we interacted with her.”
This interaction and acknowledgment of the child’s voice and preference underscore the court’s commitment to considering the feelings and opinions of the minor in custody disputes.
The ruling emphasized that
“it is the welfare of the child and not the personal law or the statute, which has paramount consideration when the parties are fighting.”
This principle, as noted by the justices, aligns with the court’s consistent stance that the child’s welfare surpasses all other legal considerations, including personal law and statutes.
This landmark decision by the Supreme Court serves as a reminder of the evolving nature of legal interpretations in the context of family law, especially concerning child custody. It highlights the shift towards a more child-centric approach, where the child’s welfare, stability, and opinions are given the utmost priority over conventional legal arguments. This case sets a precedent for future custody battles, ensuring that the child’s best interests are at the forefront of every decision.
