The judgment reinforces the need for protective oversight in child custody cases involving allegations of distress or harm to ensure safety for both child and parent.

JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

This Writ Petition has been filed by the mother of a four year old girl, alleging that the latter is being detained against law, by the 2^nd respondent – Child Welfare Committee (CWC).

2. We must record upfront that this is a case where we saw fair amount of confusion and misunderstanding as to the facts involved and presented. This is because, the ‘CWC’ suspects the mother to have tortured the daughter; while, the inputs indicate that both of them possibly require some support and assistance, with the mother not appearing to act deliberately.

3. In the afore perspective, we passed an order dated 17.02.2026, to the following effects:

Sri.B.S.Syamanthak – learned Government Pleader, submits that the petitioner is reported to be having psychological distress on account of various factors. Therefore, the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) determines that the child may not be safe with her.

2. We allowed the child to be with the mother within our watch in the Court and we saw that she was very comfortable; in fact, after some time, she was sleeping in the embrace of the petitioner.

3. Before we take a decision, we are of the view that we must evaluate the petitioner, since the child is also alleged to have been scalded and physically assaulted, whatever be the reason; but the CWC says that the petitioner did it.

4. We, therefore, direct that the petitioner, along with the child, shall present herself before the Family Counseling Centre for a counseling session.

For report of counseling, list on

18.02.2026.

After the counseling, we allow the petitioner to return home with her daughter; but with the concomitant direction to the CWC to keep a watch on the child's condition until we pass further orders. Such a watch can be maintained on a regular basis even with multiple visits every day.

List on 18.02.2026.

4. Today, Smt.A.Parvathi Menon – learned Counsel representing the ‘Victim Rights Centre’ (VRC) of this Court, confirmed our worries, namely, that both the mother and her child require support, particularly because they have certain conditions which remain latent, but with the potential to cause trouble – both physical and mental - in future.

5. We have little doubt that the child should continue with the mother; but her safety, as also that of the latter, is required to be maintained, being paramount in our consideration.

6. We are pleased that the ‘VRC’ has now intervened, and are certain that both the mother and the child are in safe hands. The ‘CWC’ also must continue their watch - not under a suspicion that the mother is causing harm to the child - but to ensure that, even inadvertently, both of them are not subjected to any detriment.

In such perspective, we allow this Writ Petition and order that the child will be with the mother henceforth; but subject to the supervision of the ‘CWC’, as statutorily required.

The ‘CWC’, on its part, will keep the ‘VRC’ - which is a service platform under the aegis of the Kerala Legal Services Authority (KeLSA) – informed of the requirements of the child and that of the mother; and we direct the latter, namely the ‘VRC’, to offer all assistance to both of them as is possible, including for rehabilitation and for their physical and mental requirements and necessities.

We request the ‘VRC’ to favour this Court with a report after a period of three weeks from today; and direct the Registry to place the said report before us for our evaluation and consideration.

Sd/-