IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
A. N. VERMA
MOHD.YUNUS - Appellant
Versus
SHAMSHAD BANO - Respondents
F. A. F. O. 795 Of 1980
Decided On : 01/01/1985
CUSTODY OF CHILDREN - GUARDIANS AND WARDS ACT - WELFARE OF THE CHILD - PERSONAL LAW - MOHAMMEDAN LAW - PARAMOUNT CONSIDERATION - COURT'S DISCRETION - SECTION 25.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a father, filed an application under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act for the custody of his two minor children, a daughter and a son, from his divorced wife, the respondent. The appellant claimed that he was entitled to their custody as their guardian, while the respondent asserted that she had left the appellant's home due to ill-treatment and that the children were receiving proper education and care with her.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the paramount consideration in determining the custody of the children was their welfare, subject to the personal law applicable to the parties. The court found that the respondent had been ill-treated by the appellant and that the children were receiving proper care and education with her. The court also noted that the son had expressed a preference to remain with the mother.
Issues: 1. Whether the personal law applicable to the parties, Mohammedan Law, should be followed in determining the custody of the children? 2. Whether the welfare of the children should be the paramount consideration in determining their custody? 3. Whether the appellant, as the father, had a right to the custody of the children?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the personal law applicable to the parties, Mohammedan Law, should be read harmoniously with the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, and that the court had to strike a balance between the two, with the dominant consideration being the welfare of the ward. 2. The court held that the welfare of the children was the paramount consideration in determining their custody, and that the court had the discretion to direct the return of a ward to the custody of a guardian in appropriate cases where it thought that such a direction was necessary for the well-being of the ward. 3. The court held that the appellant, as the father, did not have an absolute right to the custody of the children, and that the court had to consider all the relevant circumstances, including the welfare of the children, in determining their custody.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the lower court, which had rejected the appellant's petition for custody of the children.
( 1 ) THIS appeal has been filed by the father against an order dated August 28, 1980 passed by the learned II Additional district and Sessions Judge, Saharanpur rejecting his application under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act for the custody of two minor children; a daughter and a son of the appellant.
( 2 ) THE appellant was married to the respondent Smt. Shamshad Bano and from this marriage two children were born, a son named Arshad and a daughter named Afshan. The appellant and the respondent were divorced as borne out by the evidence which seems to be of unimpeachable character. In the year 1978 the appellant moved an application for the custody of these two children on the assertion that he as guardian of these two children was entitled to their custody, his wife had left 5-5 1/2 years ago on the pretext that she was going to attend a marriage in her family and on that pretext she had taken with her all her ornaments and other things as well as the two children. The attempts of the appellant to bring back the children to his house having failed and as the children were not getting proper education, it was necessary in their interest that they be given in his custody. An application to this effect was filed under Sec. 25 of the aforesaid Act.
( 3 ) THE application was contested by the mother. She asserted that she had not left on the ground alleged by the appellant but because she was ill-treated, beaten up and turned out of her husbands home. She further said that the two children were receiving the best education and were being very well looked after by her. On the contrary, if they are handed over to the appellant, the children will suffer greatly as the appellant was not in a position to look after the children properly. The court below has dismissed the appellants petition on the ground that for the welfare of the children, it is necessary that they be left with the mother. In passing this order, the Court below also ascertained the wishes of the appellants son who stated that he will prefer to remain with the mother.
( 4 ) AGGRIEVED by the aforesaid order the father has filed this appeal. For the appellant it is urged that the court below has not correctly understood the true legal position and has ignored the personal law, namely, Mohammedan Law, which was applicable to the case, in disposing of the appellants petition.
( 5 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length, I find no merit in this appeal. The legal position as seems to emerge from the various authorities cited at the Bar, seems to be that in disposing of an application under the Guardians and Wards Act the predominant consideration is the welfare of the child whose custody is claimed by rival parents. Of course, in doing so the personal law applicable to the parties cannot altogether be ignored. Subject to the personal law the paramount consideration in considering an application under S. 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act seems to be well-being of the child.
( 6 ) SEVERAL decisions have been cited by both the parties. In my opinion, however, the law has been ably summed up in a decision of this Court reported in 1969 All LJ 799 Sultan Ahmad v. Smt. Sabira Bibi. After referring to several decisions of this Court and of the Privy Council, this Court observed thus : -"a careful analysis of the personal law relating to guardianship, Sec. 17 of the Guardians and Wards Act and the relevant authorities thereon appear to lead to the following conclusions : 1. The Court while deciding the question of guardianship of a minor must, as far as possible, do so consistently with the personal law to which the minor is subject, 2. Where the dictates of personal law indicate one course of action and considerations of the welfare of the minor indicate another, the former must be subordinated to the latter. The words that furnish a key to the correct legal position are to be found in Sec. 17 of the Guardians and Wards Act. Princ
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.