LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


Are CHILD CUSTODY laws in-humane in India ?

Title: The Child custody orders in India are inhumane and are nothing short of a human rights violation.

A aam adami's take: The Indian Courts have no right whatsoever to deny a child equal parenting. But 99% of the time they deny the Indian father even basic time with his own child. The visitation they give is pathetic,  outrageous, and insufficient to sustain a relationship with his own children, and have no scientific basis in Child Psychology. By doing this, The Courts in India are actually committing a crime against the child – ironically, all in the name of the “child’s best interests”. Very very sad :-((((.

Their Honours and Their Lorships in India should take a leaf from other progressive judgements on Child custody and make shared parenting a presumption. The landmark Judgement quoted below from the United States sums it up perfectly:

GEORGIA: Court of Appeals of Georgia, Case No. A93A0698, 7/2/93

In a unanimous opinion, presiding Judge Dorothy T. Beasley stated:

"Although the dispute is symbolized by a 'versus' which signifies two adverse parties at opposite poles of a line, there is in fact a third party whose interests and rights make of the line a triangle. That person, the child who is not an official party to the lawsuit but whose wellbeing is in the eye of the controversy, has a right to shared parenting when both are equally suited to provide it. Inherent in the express public policy is a recognition of the child's right to equal access and opportunity with both parents, the right to be guided and nurtured by both parents, the right to have major decisions made by the application of both parents' wisdom, judgment and experience. The child does not forfeit these rights when the parents divorce."


Kindly share your views.............


 9 Replies

Adv Archana Deshmukh (Practicing Advocate)     14 August 2010

It is really a sad fact that in the fight between husband and wife, the children are the victims and the equal sufferrers.  A child needs love, affection and care of both the parents but there is no concept of shared custody in India. Though while deciding the issue of custody, the welfare of the child is the only consideration but the custody is given to only one parent. And it is a fact that in order to take revenge against the other partner and cause him/her maximum emotional damage, the spouse who gets the custody generally try level best not to let the other meet the child. And also brainwash the child tutoring him against the other parent by potraying the other parant as an evil man/woman.  I've seen cases where even when the seperated husband and wife are living in the same city,  the wife is not letting her husband meet the child and causing obstructions even when the court have allowed the father to meet the child only once a week for few hours...  I think there should be some change in the laws.

Arup (UNEMPLOYED)     14 August 2010

The Indian Courts ....................Very very sad

 - fully agreed with you.

children are the victims and the equal sufferrers

- children are not the victims, but they worst sufferrers. in their very child hood they can not understand what they lost, but they lost it for ever.

Renuka Gupta ( Gender Researcher )     15 August 2010

Undoubtedly Children suffer but they become resiliant too. Shared parenting: would be ideal though. However, when the relations are bitter between the spouses to the extent they cannot agree on a single thing mutually and that is why contest divorces are there, how would they agree mutually on decisions about child? I am not being personal here, but throw it as an issue for the forum to ponder about. If the same tug of war prevails over decision about child's education, health and development, the child would be more confused than ever. I assume as soon as divorce is over, the bitterness produced in the process may not disappear. Perhaps post divorce councelling for carrying out shared responsibilities for the child should be made mandatory and the counceling should be done by experienced, and highly professional counsellors. Unless there is some mutual respect between the separated parents, the child would always feel embarrassed when both of them make presence in the public on some ocassion where the child is involved, in school or in child's personal life. 

1 Like

Arup (UNEMPLOYED)     15 August 2010

" Perhaps post divorce councelling for carrying out shared responsibilities for the child should be made mandatory and the counceling should be done by experienced, and highly professional counsellors."



@ Mr Prabhakar,

Fantastic line of argument as a Advocate you have put above and I quote "If men feel pity about themselves as "sperm banks" let them feel so.  Now, they have got option of Surrogacy and need not to whimper about Indian Courts and their verdicts."

So with above line of justification you are saying following it shows;

Instead of marriage Indian men should opt for prostitutes as they have got options of availability of Prostitutes in every nook and corner of India and "need not to whimper about Indian Courts and their verdicts."  !!!!

This is how wife's get the name 'prostitutes' curtsey a Advocates line of argument is what aam adami comment is.

Instead of choosing nature's way of selection of s*x for fulfiling a couples s*xual desires comes bundled in a marriage Indian men should make love to thy neighbourhood women as they have got options of availability of a s*xualy attractive women in neighbourhood and "need not to whimper about Indian Courts and their verdicts."  !!!!

This is how fatherless society is created in neighbourhood by Advocates line of argument is what aam adami comment is.

Instead of marrying and settleing down in marriage Indian men should now opt for surrogates as they  as they have got options of availability of a fertile women pan India to be surrogate and "need not to whimper about Indian Courts and their verdicts."  !!!!

This is how capacity to reproduce the natures way and settle down in marriage is broken in society once you make women surrogates in neighbourhood by Advocates line of argument is what aam adami comment is.

Then why preach here and call 'wife' a bala and with this I salute to your line of argument so the cat's color is out :-) 


@ general

The Delphi technique is the concept or ideology in a Democracy its self..........to have an owner, in exchange for "protection" the Delphi technique has three basic tenents: Doctrine of Atomis, Clear and Present Danger Doctrine, and Doctrine of Democratis-Democracy

1. Doctrine of Atomis (move people away from each other).........................

in a family court case, this is done by the initial stages which is just immediately after the financial discovery phase.........when both parents are told they are going to have Shared custody (this word, is NOT equal, it is shared see the lollipop).......upon hearing this, the parent who did not work, automatically assumes that they are going to be left high and dry (if parents share equally there are no child support awards anyway) see the law on Guardianships there is no maint / compensation word there for temporary custodial parent..........

2. Clear and present Danger Doctrine...

at this time, the person telling both parties this, also tells both parties,that their custody is to be SHARED UNLESS there are circumstances to change this. THIS, the word is the pit of the two parents.........the one that does not work, usually the mother, is told first, that she is not going to get the house, she is not going to get child support (by use of the word shared) BUT that this can change, IF that there are circumstances so to speak in days to come and this starts trail of false allegation case against the father..............

3. Doctrine of Democratis...

offer the "victim", Protection (incentive, benefit).............in this case, it is in the FORM of FEMINISM, as this is the political tool to redistribute all of the family / personal wealth this, Delphi technique is employed in all facets of Politics..................using ISM after ISM to garner benefit for Politics................you can interchange racism with feminism, or communism with fascism, any ism has always a victim class, and a perpetrator class that the victim is given "protection" from.............

Hence, child custody laws in India works basically in above doctrines and simply saying go to surrogates is a foolish statement said it with permission in adult domain Sir.

Rajesh (consultant)     27 January 2013

Indian judiciary is not yet keeping pace with the development around the world. There is enough scientific literature which showed the children of broken home are more prone for psychiatric disorders and this fact is well acclaimed by the judiciary all around the world and thus adapting the concept of "Shared Parenting". They are clear about enforcing their orders and and on many occasions sent the custodial parent to the jail for disobeying the orders stating that the custodial parents cannot hide behing the wishes of the child which are not their own. It is said the child is to be treated like when he does not want to go to school, he is made to go to school. The custodial parent is primarily responsible for enforcing the visiting rights of non-custodial parent failing which custodial parent cannot be said to be eligible parent because it prevents the child from his well-being and his rights of care, love and affection from both the parent. Further, the judiciary also unaware of the scientific fact that the child separeted from father suffers 5-10 times more risk of developing psychiatric disorder that being separted from mother. The last, how can judiciary override these medical scientific facts when the non-custodial parents is prevented from meeting the child on "Child expressed not to meet the non-custodial parent and it would cause "Emotional trauma" if he is forced to meet the parent". What is emotional trauma? Is it bigger than the above mentioned risk? How the said conclusion of emotional trauma is reached at without any scientific basis? Can it not be taken care by proper counselling? The prevention of non-custodial parents to the child is nothing but the death of the non-custodial parent and all his relatives from the point of view of the child. If one death in the house causes so much emotional trama then how big it would be emotional trauma to the child if he had all his paternal relative dead. Has anytime judiciary looked at it? The biggest question is when the judiciary would look at it in more broader, scientific and sensitive perspective involving the concerned professionals in assessments of custodial parents in their ability of parenting and the child rather than relying on their own wisdom in line with changing trends all aound the world based on above said scietific facts? This probably needs amendment in the law.

stanley (Freedom)     28 January 2013

The U.N convention of child rights which has been ratified and adopted by india is not even being followed. 

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register