The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has overturned a lower court’s ruling and restored the interim custody of a six-year-old girl to her mother, ruling that a child’s emotional stability must take precedence over parental conflicts and unproven legal allegations.
In an order issued on July 2, Justice Sanjay Parihar determined that the trial court committed a jurisdictional error by transferring custody to the father based on ongoing, unresolved disputes. The high court clarified that custody decisions must focus entirely on the welfare of the child rather than penalizing a parent over unproven criminal accusations.
Prioritising Stability Over Allegations
Justice Parihar noted that sudden changes in a child’s living situation can harm their psychological and emotional development, particularly at a young and formative age. After personally interacting with the child—whom he described as cooperative, cheerful, and intelligent—the judge emphasized that her need for safety, educational continuity, and a nurturing environment was paramount.
While acknowledging that a six-year-old’s preferences are not legally binding, the court used the interaction to evaluate her emotional comfort and security.
Escalating Marital Disputes
The custody dispute arose from a crumbling marriage that began in 2015 when the couple married under Hindu rites, followed by an Islamic Nikah ceremony in 2019. After living together since meeting in 2013, the couple separated in 2023 due to marital discord, which quickly led to multiple legal battles.
In May 2024, the mother filed a petition under the Guardians and Wards Act to secure guardianship, expressing fear that the father would take the child. In August 2024, the father allegedly took the girl by force and hid her. Following a police search triggered by an FIR from the mother, the Child Welfare Committee intervened and returned custody to the mother in November 2024. Meanwhile, the mother also filed a separate FIR in October 2024 accusing the husband of marital rape.
Trial Court Error Rectified
The legal battle took a turn on August 28, 2025, when a trial court granted interim custody to the father, concluding that the mother had misrepresented facts and used false marital rape accusations to secure custody. The father’s lawyer, Advocate Virendra Dev Singh, had argued that the mother used the criminal allegations as a tactic to control the child.
Appealing the decision, the mother’s lawyer, Advocate Shayaan Chouhan, argued that the trial court was improperly influenced by unproven marital disputes. He pointed out that the Child Welfare Committee had previously deemed the mother’s home safe and comfortable for the child, and argued that the lower court ignored the child’s young age and gender.
The High Court agreed with the mother’s counsel, ruling that the trial court had no basis to declare the mother’s criminal complaints false while they were still being investigated. Justice Parihar stated that under the Guardians and Wards Act, courts must act in a protective parental capacity to safeguard the child’s best interests, rather than assigning blame based on pending litigation. The High Court restored interim custody to the mother and directed the trial court to establish a visitation schedule for the father.
