Grand Parents are more attached emotionally with grandchildren - Supreme Court

Emotionally the grandparents will always take better care of their grandson because they are emotionally  attached says Supreme Court.

        The Bench of Justices of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose while quashing the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and handing over the custody a minor corpus, Pranav Acharya  to the appellant, paternal grandparent,  requested the paternal grandparents and maternal aunts to forget  bitterness and forget past and look in the future taking into consideration the future of the minor, who lost his parents at the age of five only. Grand Parents are more attached emotonally with grandchildren - Supreme Court says

        The appellant, paternal grandfather of the minor aged 5 years aggrieved by the impugned judgement and order passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad who passed custody right to the maternal aunt, respondent,  approached the Supreme Court praying for the custody of minor in favour of the appellant.

        The High Court by its impugned judgment handed over the custody to the maternal aunt of the minor, whose both the  parents died during the second wave of Covid-19 but ensuring the respondent, maternal aunt to act as a bridge between the Corpus and petitioner, paternal grandparents  so that emotional bonding remain intact.

 

        The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted

§      The High Court has committed grave error by not giving the valid reasons on not to give the custody of corpus with the paternal grandparents.

§      The reasons given by the High Court for not giving custody to the appellant are not germane.

§      There are no findings given by the appellant would not be in position to take care of his grandson.

§      Merely because paternal grandfather and grandmother are 71 and 63 years old, there cannot be presumption that grandparents cannot take better care of the grandson.

§      Merely because maternal aunt is having a bigger family, there cannot be any presumption that they will take better care than the grandparents.

§      The minor has not stated anything against the grandparents that he is not being taken proper care during the interim custody allowance.

        The learned counsel for the respondent, maternal aunt submitted that the High Court has considered all the surrounding factor, namely

·                          The maternal aunt is in good health aged about 42 to look after, care and devote attention towards the welfare and upbringing of the corpus

·                          The maternal aunt is educated and a Central Government employee having decent salary. Whereas the paternal grandfather  is a retired government employee and living on pension which is not much. So maternal aunt would be in a better position to look after and take care of the corpus that the appellant, paternal grandfather

·                          The High Court has considered  the substantive difference of staying in a joint family being better suited to cater the educational need including interactions of teacher, need of co-curricular activities

·                          The High Court has taken into consideration wholesome development of corpus.

 

        The Hon’ble Supreme Court after hearing both the parties’ submissions, analysed that the reasons stated by the High Court in the impugned judgment and order  while handing over the custody to the maternal aunt is unsustainable and the same deserved to be quashed and set aside.

The Apex Court while allowing the appeal stated and viewed

ü                        That since the minor has shown his inclination to stay with the appellant so recorded in a order and since  nothing was  observed by the High Court that the appellant did not take proper care of the minor during interim custody period and that they acted detrimental to the interest of the minor.

ü                        The reason assigned by the High Court may be relevant but not germane. There cannot be presumption that the maternal aunt being unmarried having an independent income and having bigger family would take proper care than the paternal grandparents.

At this the Court viewed that

“In our society still the paternal grandparents would always take better care of their grandson. One should not doubt the capacity and/or ability of the paternal grandparents to take care of their grandson. It is said that the grandparents love the interest rather than the principle. Emotionally also the grandparents will always take care better care of their grandson. Grand Parents are more attached emotionally with grandchildren”.

 

ü                        The  Appellant, paternal grandparents has managed to get admission of the minor in a school in Ahmedabad, which is  metro city as compared to maternal aunt who lives in Dahod, a tribal area. Being a retired person, paternal grandparents would devote more time and take better care of minor where income and/or age and/or the bigger family cannot be the sole criteria to tilt the balance and not to give the custody to the appellant.

Therefore the impugned judgment and order of the High Court being unsustainable was quashed and set aside by allowing the appellant right to have custody of the corpus minor.  However the Court gave visitation right to the maternal aunt  for which the appellant shall provide a right to meet the corpus on regular basis once a month according to the convenient of minor child. Lastly  the Court requested both the paternal grandparents and maternal aunt to act jointly and cordially and have cordial relations which will be in the larger interest of the minor.

 

Case: Swaminathan Kunchu Acharya Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 898 OF 2022)

DOJ: 09.06.2022