Custody arrangements must prioritize children's welfare and emotional needs, advocating a shift from parent-centric to a children-centric approach to ensure their best interests.

JUDGMENT :

Devan Ramachandran, J.

In the rather long stretch that this Bench has sat in this jurisdiction-being for over a year and a half, there are certain aspects that have caused us deep anguish and concern. We want to spell them out and carve a way forward, for future reference.

2. Litigation related to custody of children invariably becomes uncontrollable because of the ego and strife between their parents - creating irreparable trauma and causing manifest toll on them.

3. It is rather painful that not many parents even have the insight to comprehend what we tell them - particularly when we interact with them in our chambers, so as to provide them the necessary privacy; and continue litigation, disregarding and ignoring the tenebrious shadow their actions would cast on their children in future, and even in praesenti.

4. We have, in numerous occasions, obtained a ringside view of the trauma and misery caused to children, on account of litigation to which they are exposed to without any fault that can be attributed to them.

5. In Indu S v. Thomas @ Manoj [2025 (3) KHC 295], we, therefore, declared that, while children are exchanged for the purpose of custody or interim custody, the premises of courts are to be completely avoided; and our mind was forged by the express pathos voiced by children before us, in being paraded and forced to endure experiences that erode their self worth.

6. The issues we have witnessed are multitudinous; and the psychological impact and devastation, which we unfailingly notice, is something indescribable.

7. We are fully aware that this is not a case where the custody of the children is directly in issue; but it is indirectly so, because the petitioner–mother of a boy and a girl aged 10 and 12 years respectively, has approached this Court seeking that they be given to her, through the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, on the allegation that they are being illegally detained by the 5^th respondent–father.

8. The factual conspectus that we see in this case, is no different from what we are called upon to evaluate and answer in matters directly where custody is involved; and are, therefore, of the firm opinion that the time has come for us to speak affirmatively, lest history judge us inadequately.

9. It does not require us to expatiate that children, in custody matters, are victims who are drawn into the battle between their parents for nothing that they can comprehend, or for anything they have contributed. They are born to parents when they are in love; but when they fall out, children become the victims of their strife.

10. Parents invariably do not understand, or pretend not to do so, the immeasurable brunt their actions have on their children; and most often interpret the children's reactions - being either in their favour or against them - solely as per individual perspective, accusing each other of tutoring them, or fostering biases, but standing oblivious to it that children are humans, conceding to emotions and needs like any adult. 11. When children are produced by one of the parents in obedience to orders, there is always an axiomatic suspicion impelled by the other that, he or she is tutored to show alienation; but, in our long experience, when we allowed the child/children to remain with the parent not in custody, for a sufficiently long time, the situation changed, with the former expressing affection, which ha