The significance of the age of majority in custody matters and the liberty of a child who has attained majority to live as per their own will and desire.

JUDGMENT :

NISHA M. THAKORE, J.

1. This appeal is filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, by the original- complainant challenging, the judgment and order dated 06.03.2018 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Anand, vide Exh.65 in Civil Misc. Application (Guardian) No. 29 of 2014. By the said judgment and order, the learned Judge has rejected the application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, refusing the prayer of custody of minor child of the appellant-original complainant. While passing the aforesaid order, the learned Judge has further permitted the original complainant to meet his minor son on every second Sunday with the mutual understanding of the parties.

2. Before we express on merits of the case, it would be appropriate to consider the facts, which has emerged on record. The husband of the appellant had expired on 06.01.2013 leaving behind the appellant and his two minor sons. The elder son namely Zaid was aged around 10 years and younger son namely Azim was aged around 5 years. The date of birth of Zaid is 22.01.2005.

2.1. It is the case of the appellant that after the unfortunate demise of the husband, the appellant was driven out of her matrimonial home. Initially, she was refused to the custody of her children. In such circumstances, she was compelled to approach this Court by filing petition for habeas corpus, which was registered as Special Criminal Application No. 1408 of 2014. In the said petition, considering the allegations made against the father-in-law and mother-in-law and other family members and noticing the age of the children, this Court had directed the respondents to remain present with both the children. The Court, at that stage, had occasion to interact with both the children. Upon interaction with the children, the court noticed that welfare of both the minor children are appropriately taken care of. The bank guarantee was offered to see to it that an amount of Rs.20,000/- is made available to the daughter-in-law i.e. present appellant towards regular maintenance.

2.2 The grandfather of the minor children had offered to make arrangement of Rs.10,000/- per month on a condition that the such money should be exclusively utilized for the welfare of both his grand sons. In such circumstances, this Court vide order dated 23.04.2014, had granted time to make such appropriate arrangement and in the meantime, the custody of the minor child Azim was handed over to the present appellant. As regards the custody of minor child Zaid, the Court had called for relevant financial papers. As per the understanding between the parties, the financial arrangement were made and the aforesaid amounts were directed to be deposited by the father-in-law of the present appellant and the appellant was directed to withdraw such amount.

2.3 The Court noticed that the minor son Azim was happy with his mother and had expressed his desire to stay with the mother. This Court, therefore, directed the custody of minor son Azim to the present appellant until further orders. However, so far as the custody of minor child Zaid, who was aged around 10 years, is concerned, he had expressed to stay back with his grand parents and was ready to meet his brother Azim, as and when, he desires. Thus, the court had permitted minor child Zaid to meet his younger brother Azim or his mother on every Sunday at about 11.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. At the same time, the visitation rights of minor child Azim by the respondentsgrand parents, were not permitted. The parties have continued with such arrangement.

2.4 At that stage, this Court had an occasion to interact with minor son Zaid, and he had once again expressed to continue to stay with his grand parents, who were also present in the Court. Upon persuasion, he requested to permit his younger brother Azim to visit his grand parents’ home to enable him to spend time together.

2.5 The Court upon considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, was persuaded to modif