IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V.G. ARUN, J.
Xxxx – Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
W.P(C) No. 35211 Of 2024
Decided On : 25-10-2024
(A) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 3 - Custody of minor child - The Child Welfare Committee found the mother unfit to care for her child based on moral judgments rather than legal reasoning, violating principles of natural justice and the child's right to breastfeed - The court emphasized that decisions must prioritize the child's best interest and adhere to procedural fairness. (Paras 10, 11, 14, 15, 16)
(B) Fundamental Rights - Article 21 - Right to life - The court recognized the right of a lactating mother to breastfeed her child as a fundamental right, which was disregarded by the CWC in its decision. (Paras 14, 15)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a lactating mother, challenged the CWC's order granting custody of her child to her husband, citing harassment and her right to breastfeed. The CWC's decision was based on moral perceptions rather than legal standards.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the CWC failed to consider the mother's right to breastfeed and the best interest of the child, leading to an unjust custody decision.
Issues: The main issues were whether the CWC acted within its powers and the implications of separating a breastfeeding mother from her child.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the CWC's decision was flawed due to a lack of adherence to legal principles and natural justice, emphasizing the importance of the child's best interest.
Result: The writ petition was allowed, and custody of the child was ordered to be returned to the mother.
JUDGMENT :
(V.G. ARUN, J.)
A young lactating mother is before this Court, aggrieved by an order passed by the Child Welfare Committee (hereinafter referred to as “CWC”), finding her unfit to look after her baby aged just one year and four months and gave custody of the baby to her husband the 3rd respondent herein. The circumstances that led to the impugned order are as under;
“issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to handover the custody of the minor daughter Duva Mariam to the petitioner herein.”
2. When this writ petition came up for admission, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the baby is being breastfed by the petitioner and by reason of the impugned order, the child is deprived of mother's milk. Thereupon, this Court issued the following direction;
4. The Station House Officer, Kumily Police Station is suo motu impleaded as the additional 4th respondent. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for the additional 4th respondent. The additional 4th respondent shall serve a copy of this order to the 3rd respondent and require him to produce the child between 10.00 am and 11.00 am every day.”
3. On receipt of notice from this Court, the 3rd respondent entered appearance and filed a counter affidavit along with a copy of order of the CWC dated 23.09.2024, containing the reasons for depriving the petitioner the custody of her baby. Thereupon, the petitioner amended the writ petition by incorporating a prayer for quashing that order (Ext.P8). A rough translation of the reasons stated in Ext.P8 order is given below;
AI
The court emphasized that custody decisions must prioritize the child's best interest and adhere to principles of natural justice, recognizing the mother's right to breastfeed as fundamental.
Custody decisions must prioritize the best interest of the child and adhere to natural justice principles, ensuring that moral biases do not influence legal outcomes.
The welfare of the child is paramount in child custody matters, and the court has parens patriae jurisdiction to ensure the child's well-being.
The court reaffirmed that the removal of a child from adoptive parents without due consideration of established bonds and legal procedures is unlawful, emphasizing the best interest of the child.
The importance of following the procedures outlined in the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and the Rules, 2018 to protect the best interest of the child throughout the adoption process.
Guardians and Wards - Child in need of care and protection – Rights of children - Rights of children are protected and that broad and purposeful interpretation is given to the definition “child in ne....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.