LexKOMAL KRISHAN ARORA & ORS. versus SANDEEP KUMAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 1085 : 2025 INSC 1123 Komal Krishan Arora & Ors. v. Sandeep Kumar & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 4052 of 2025) 16 September 2025 [J.K. Maheshwari* and Vijay Bishnoi, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the directions issued by the High Court that the interim custody of the minor son aged five years be handed over to the father from the custody of the maternal grandfather warrants interference. Headnotes† Custody – Child custody – Welfare of the minor children – Strained marital relationship of the parents – Mother left India for UK with both the children-minor daughter and son, allegedly without the father’s knowledge or consent – Father initiated proceedings in UK High Court seeking return of the children – UK Court ordered the mother to facilitate video calls between the father and the children, however, during these calls, son was made unavailable – Later father got to know that his son was in India with his maternal grandfather – Writ of habeas corpus by the father, wherein the interim custody of the son was directed to be handed over to the father – Interference: Held: Not called for – Welfare and best interest of the child would be served if he would continue with the father, as such the High Court justified in granting the interim custody of minor son to the father – Judgment of the UK High Court reveals that when the statement of the minor daughter was taken, the reflection of hate against father cannot been ruled out – While leaving the son in India, it was mother’s primary duty to inform the father, which was not discharged, as also she did not disclose to UK High Court in the proceedings initiated by father that the son was not with her – Due to such conduct, the father was deprived of having virtual meetings * Author 1086 [2025] 9 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports with the son despite orders from UK High Court and ultimately had to file the habeas corpus petition when the suspicion brewed – Displeasure is expressed over the conduct of the mother which is clearly not in favour of the welfare of the the son and the manner in which the son was left by her at Sonipat with the grandparents and the same is deprecated – Judicial system in India as well as UK had been taken for a ride by the mother for the reasons known best to her – Factum of leaving the child with the grandparents could only be unveiled when the proceedings were set in motion on filing of the writ of habeas corpus, wherein the interim custody of the child had been directed to be handed over to the father looking to the best interest of the child – In such circumstances, where the mother is staying in London with her daughter and son is staying with grandparents, despite the availability of father, who has sufficient means of sustenance to undertake the well-being of the child, the best interest of the son needs to be ascertained – Father is residing in Noida which is more suitably located than Sonipat, having better educational institutes, thus, welfare of the son, would be served if the interim custody of the child is given to the father who is also the natural guardian, subject to further orders by the competent Court of jurisdiction – Both the parties to file appropriate proceedings under the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, before the competent Court. [Paras 19-22] Case Law Cited Lahari Sakhamuri v. Sobhan Kodali [2019] 5 SCR 240 : (2019) 7 SCC 311; Rajeswari Chandrasekar Ganesh v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others [2022] 5 SCR 232 : (2023) 12 SCC 472; Neethu B. v. Rajesh Kumar, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1435 – referred to. List of Acts Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. List of Keywords Custody of the minor son; Custody; Welfare of the minor children; Strained marital relationship; UK High Court; Facilitate video calls; Maternal grandfather; Writ of habeas corpus; Interim custody; Displeasure expressed over the conduct of the mother; Deprecation; Judicial system in India; Father, natural guardian. [2025] 9 S.C.R. 1087 Komal Krishan Arora & Ors. v. Sandeep Kumar & Ors. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE/INHERENT JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 4052 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 16.11.2021 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CRWP NO. 8954 of 2021. With Contempt Petition (C) No. 325 of 2022 In Special Leave Petition (Crl) No. 9497 of 2021, Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 124-125 of 2024 In Special Leave Petition (Crl) No. 9497 of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.