NATURAL GUARDIAN NOT ENTITLED TO CUSTODY: HC

MUMBAI : Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday rejected the petition filed by a resident of Osmanabad district for custody of his 16-year-old son from his in-laws, observing that he was not ipso-facto entitled to his minor son’s custody despite being a natural guardian.

The petitioner, Suhas Gangawane, was prosecuted for murdering his wife in October 2012. After getting acquitted of the murder charge in 2016, he had applied to the District Judge, Latur for custody of his son, Asit, who was residing with his maternal grandparents after his arrest.

The 43-year-old moved HC, after the district judge rejected his plea under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. In HC, it was argued on his behalf that the father being a natural guardian was entitled to custody of his son, especially when his minor daughter was staying with him and he was taking her proper care.

A single-judge bench of justice Shrikant Kulkarni, however, upheld the lower court order. “Section 25 of the Act provides remedy for seeking custody of a minor ward,” said the bench. “But, the guardian who applies under Section 25 of the Act is not ipso facto entitled to relief. The Court on enquiry must be satisfied that it is necessary for the welfare of the minor to hand over the custody of the minor to the guardian,” it added. The HC noted that in this case, the district judge had interviewed the minor in person and the boy had refused to go back to his father. Besides, in the ten years, the father had not provided any maintenance.