Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Court's Custody Decision Must Prioritize Child's Welfare: Tripura High Court

05 September 2024 5:51 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Tripura High Court has emphasized that decisions in child custody disputes must prioritize the welfare and best interests of the child over all other considerations. The ruling comes in response to a challenge to a custody order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, where appellants sought redress, claiming that the appellate court's decision lacked proper reasoning and may not have adequately considered the welfare of the minor child.

High Court stated, "The court's paramount consideration is the welfare and interest of the child, not the rights of the parents under the statute. The child's psychology and well-being must not be hampered. Custody arrangements should be made to ensure the child's access to both parents." This observation underscores the central principle that the child's welfare should always be at the forefront of custody decisions.

The judgment further highlighted the importance of visitation and contact rights, stating, "Even if custody is given to one parent, the other parent should have sufficient visitation and contact rights. Courts should define the nature, manner, and specifics of visitation rights to maintain the child's bond with both parents." This recognition of the significance of maintaining relationships with both parents echoes the court's commitment to the child's well-being.

The court's decision also addressed the challenges posed by parental disputes in custody battles. It emphasized the need for negotiated settlements between parents, stating, "Custody disputes can be detrimental to the child's well-being. Parents should prioritize the child's interests over their differences, as the child's psychological balance is deeply affected by parental conflict." This statement underscores the court's call for an amicable resolution to custody disputes, with the child's welfare as the top priority.

Tripura High court's ruling sets a precedent by emphasizing that custody decisions should always prioritize the child's interests and welfare. The desire and welfare of the child must be the crucial considerations in such cases, ensuring that the child is not deprived of the love and affection of both parents. Custody arrangements should be designed to guarantee the child's access to both parents, ensuring their well-being and emotional health.

This judgment reflects a significant shift in how child custody cases are approached, placing the child's welfare at the forefront of legal decisions and encouraging parents to prioritize the child's best interests over personal disputes.

Date of Decision: 12 October 2023

Shri Rakesh Chandra Saha VS Smti. Puja Dey Saha

 

Latest Legal News