Father’s remarriage does not weaken his claim for child custody; grandparents cannot have a stronger claim than him, according to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court decided that a father’s remarriage does not affect his custody claim, and grandparents cannot have a stronger claim than the father, who is the child’s natural guardian. The father, who is appealing, challenged the Writ Court’s decision in a Habeas Corpus Writ Petition that denied him custody of his child, currently living with the grandparents after the mother’s death. Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran stated, “The father, as the natural guardian, is well-educated and employed, and there are no legal barriers to his rights to seek custody.”
AOR Nishant Verma represented the father, while AOR Arup Banerjee represented the grandparents. The Single Judge who handled the Writ Petition spoke with the child, who expressed that he was happy living and studying at his maternal grandfather’s home. It was noted that the father had remarried. Based on these observations, it was concluded that the child’s best interests would be served by allowing him to stay with his grandfather. The father was given visitation rights to see the child on the first day of each month at a location set by the local police.
The Bench observed that the father was trying to gain custody from the grandparents, who were caring for the child with help from the mother’s siblings. The grandfather also filed for maintenance, requesting Rs. 20,000 per month for the child, indicating that the grandparents could not fully support the child on their own.
The father is a well-educated individual with a significant role in the State’s administrative services. Even though he has remarried, this does not affect his custody claim, especially since concerns about the child’s care would arise due to the father’s work commitments, the Bench stated. The Bench pointed out that the Single Judge did not try to understand the child’s feelings towards his father. The child lived with both parents for about ten years until his mother’s passing. He was separated from his father in 2021 and has been living with his grandparents, who cannot claim custody over the father, the natural guardian. There were no allegations of marital issues or abuse during the mother’s lifetime, the Bench noted.
The Bench concluded that, given the circumstances, the child’s best interests would be served by granting custody to the father. Acknowledging that the child has not been with his father for over three years and is currently with his grandparents as the school year ends, the Bench decided that the child should stay with his grandfather until April 30, 2025. The father will have the child on alternate weekends. This arrangement will last until May 1, 2025, when custody will officially transfer to the father in the presence of the local Station House Officer. After custody is transferred, the grandparents will have visitation rights and can take the child every weekend that includes the second Saturday, starting in June 2025, continuing for a year, or as the child wishes.
Cause Title: Vivek Kumar Chaturvedi & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 159) Appearance:
Appellants: AOR Nishant Verma, Advocates Gopal Jha, Amitabh Ranjan, Samiksha Sharma, Jitendra Kumar Singh
Respondents: AOR Arup Banerjee, Advocates Amitabh Poddar, Priyanshu Raj, Prakash Sharma, Rajiv Agnihotri, Anjali Mishra, Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Saurabh Singh Chauhan, Deveshi Chand, Srujana Suman Mund, AOR Saroj Tripathi
