Back
A Daughter’s Choice: MP High Court Grants Custody of Minor Despite Pending POCSO Trial
In a significant order balancing legal process with the expressed autonomy of a minor, the has allowed a 14-year-old girl to reside with her father and elder sister, effectively overturning her detention in a shelter home. The court’s decision comes amidst a contentious backdrop of a pending criminal case registered under the against the father.
The Shadow of Matrimonial Discord
The legal battle originated as a writ of filed by the girl's father and her elder sister. They alleged that the teenager had been illegally removed from the family home by state officials—specifically the and the —following a complaint lodged by the wife and mother, who is currently embroiled in a severe matrimonial dispute with her husband.
The father stands accused in a criminal case at , facing charges under and relevant provisions of the , alleging sexual harassment of his daughters. However, the daughters have consistently maintained that these allegations were coerced by their mother as a tactic within their parents' ongoing matrimonial conflict.
Judicial Wisdom and the Voice of the Child
During the proceedings, Justices Subodh Abhyankar and Alok Awasthi took the unusual, yet essential, step of interacting directly with the minor and her elder sister. The court’s primary concern was to understand the genuine desire of the child, ensuring she was not being manipulated by either parent.
The court noted that the 14-year-old, a student in the ninth grade who is preparing for IIT-JEE exams, remained steadfast in her refusal to stay at the government-sanctioned . Her sister, a B.Tech graduate, echoed these sentiments, alleging that they were forced into making false statements against their father by their mother.
Key Observations from the Bench
The High Court’s ruling underscored the importance of listening to a child’s clear and informed preferences:
-
"The has unequivocally and in no unclear words has expressed her desire to reside with her sister and father."
-
"She has also stated that her father has never ill-treated her in any manner and in fact is looking after of her needs including her study in a reputed private institute."
-
"When both the daughters of the petitioner no.2 are well informed, carrier-oriented and are capable of taking their own decision ... we have no hesitation to come to a conclusion that petitioners have made out a case for interference."
Balancing Public Policy and Personal Autonomy
The High Court was careful to distinguish this decision from the ongoing criminal trial. By granting the girl's request to return home, the bench did not absolve the father of the pending POCSO charges, stating that the trial court should remain uninfluenced by these proceedings.
To ensure the girl's safety and provide her with a mechanism to reach out if her circumstances changed, the court imposed a practical condition: the petitioners must provide the minor with a mobile phone and the contact details of the local (SHO), who is directed to attend any calls from her at any hour.
As reported by , this ruling reinforces the judicial trend of prioritizing the welfare and independent voice of a child over institutionalized care, even when serious criminal allegations are pending against a guardian. This case serves as a poignant reminder that in the eyes of the law, the child’s well-being remains the paramount consideration.
