Alok Singh
On 31st July 2025, the Principal District Judge Anantnag passed an order with significant observations pertaining to the custody of the children. Judge Tahir Khurshid Raina remarked that the father of the child should win the child by unconditional love, not through the means of litigation. The Court emphasised that the “welfare of the child” is the most important consideration for deciding the custody.
The matter was around the custody of a 10-year-old boy. A previous compromise agreement dated 29th October 2024, had laid out arrangements: the child was to be admitted to a new school, the father would bear educational expenses, and he would get to meet the child every Friday. But the agreement collapsed, sparking a new round of litigation.
Three separate petitions were filed, two by the father for the enforcement of the original compromise and disobedience proceedings against the mother. Meanwhile, the mother asks for cancellation of the agreement, citing a lack of consent and understanding.
The interesting point of the proceedings is the consideration given by the Court to the voice of the child who didn’t want to meet his father or change schools, and was happy with his mother. The Court emphasised that rejection for living with his father was not the result of coaching or manipulation; it stemmed from years of absence and lack of emotional connection.
Invoking its jurisdiction under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, the court recognised that it wasn’t just dealing with legal rights, but with a human issue. Citing the landmark Supreme Court decision in Nil Ratan Kundu v. Abhijit Kundu, the judgment reiterated:
“A child is not a property or commodity… Courts must apply a human touch.”
While the father had every right to seek custody and visitation, the court made it clear that rights cannot override the welfare and will of the child. Forcing interaction, the judge noted, would amount to emotional torture, contradicting the very spirit of the law.
The court dismissed all petitions by the father, including the bid to enforce the compromise. The judge emphasised that no court order can substitute parental love and urged the father to try a different path, i.e. love.
Click here to access the order.
Judge: Tahir Khurshid Raina
Instagram: Click Here.
LinkedIn: Click Here.
For Collaboration and Business: Click Here.