HC restores child’s custody to mother, grants father supervised visitation

In her petition, the mother said that on April 26, 2026, while she was at work, the father visited her residence and deceitfully took the child away without her consent.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has restored the custody of a nine-year-old boy to his mother, observing that there was a real possibility of the father taking the child to Nepal, making it extremely difficult for the mother to regain custody despite a family court decree in her favour.

HC restores child’s custody to mother, grants father supervised visitation

A division bench of Justices Sarang V. Kotwal and Ashish S. Chavan noted that under a consent divorce decree passed in November 2025, the parties had agreed that the child would remain in the mother’s custody while the father would have visitation rights.

In her petition, the mother said that on April 26, 2026, while she was at work, the father visited her residence and deceitfully took the child away without her consent.

During the hearing on July 9, the mother relied on the transcript of a telephonic conversation in which the father allegedly said that even if the “entire police force of India” searched for him, they would not find him. He also allegedly threatened that unless the case against him was withdrawn, the mother would never be able to contact the child again.

The mother further argued that the father was bound by the stand he had taken before the family court and contended that if the child was allowed to accompany him, he could take him to Nepal. A police officer informed the court that a team had traced the father to a village in Uttar Pradesh, barely two kilometres from the Nepal border. According to the officer, the father returned only after being contacted by his brother.

The father, however, submitted that it would not be possible to send the child back to the mother as the child did not wish to live with her.

The court held that it was in the child’s best interests to remain with the mother, particularly as he was enrolled in a good school in Chembur. It also observed that there was a real possibility of the father taking the child to Nepal, which would make it difficult for the mother to regain custody despite the decree in her favour.

Observing that the father was free to initiate appropriate legal proceedings if he wished to seek custody, the court directed that the child be handed over to the mother immediately. It also ordered police protection to ensure the child’s safe return home, restrained the father from harassing the mother, and granted him supervised visitation for two hours every morning in the presence of a male member of the mother’s family.