Child’s Welfare Paramount, Father’s Right to Custody Not Absolute: Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Grandparents’ Custody

In a significant judgment that prioritizes the welfare of the child over parental rights, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, comprising Hon’ble Shri Justice Sheel Nagu and Hon’ble Shri Justice Vinay Saraf, affirmed the custody of a minor child with the maternal grandparents. The court dismissed the appeal filed by Manoj Ghodehwar, the biological father, in Misc. Appeal No. 368 of 2020, against the earlier order of the First Additional District Judge, Waraseoni.

The bench observed, “The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration,” emphasizing that the father’s right to custody is not absolute but circumscribed by the consideration of the child’s welfare.

Manoj Ghodehwar had challenged the lower court’s decision, which denied him the custody of his son Prateek, living with his maternal grandparents following the mother’s remarriage. The appellant argued that as a natural guardian, he was entitled to the custody of his son. However, the respondents countered this by highlighting the appellant’s alleged past abusive behavior towards the child’s mother and the stability provided by the grandparents.

In its detailed analysis, the High Court referred to the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, underscoring the principle that the father’s guardianship is not an absolute right. “The legal right or financial affluence is not decisive but the welfare of the minor which is decisive for the claim of custody,” the court noted.

The court also gave considerable weight to the preference of the 14-year-old child, who expressed a desire to continue living with his maternal grandparents. This was in line with Section 17(3) of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, which mandates considering the minor’s preference if they are old enough to form an intelligent opinion.

Date of Decision:  18 JANUARY, 2024

MANOJ GHODEHWAR VS YASHWANT MESHRAM