Kerala HC directs Family Courts that Police stations can’t be involved in children’s custody arrangements

The Kerala High Court ordered Family Courts to refrain from involving police stations in child custody arrangements, on 20th May. This ruling was pronounced by the bench of Justices Devan Ramachandran and MB Snehalatha after they observed a family court judgment instructing the parents to exchange the child in police custody as a temporary custody arrangement.

“We take this case as an opportunity to state something that is far more important, particularly qua the mental and physical health of children, who are caught in the cross-fire of litigation between their parents,” the court stated.

Children involved in custody disputes should only be called to court in extreme cases, according to a previous verdict by the same bench. The court then remarked that children were experiencing trauma as a result of being called to court. Additionally, the bench mandated that the child be exchanged at a neutral location rather than on court property.

“However, in the case at hand, we see that when the learned Family Court made an arrangement regarding the interim custody of the child involved, the exchange was directed to be done at a police station. In our view, this is worse than the child being forced to court premises and spaces and are sure that it requires no further expatiation or restatement,” the court expressed and added, “We fail to understand how the learned Family Court could have directed the child to be handed over in interim custody from a police station. We certainly cannot find favour with this.”

The father was ordered to have temporary custody of the child from 2nd to 26th May. According to the contested ruling, the kid must be produced before the court at 11 am on 27th May in order for the mother, the appellant in this case, to receive him back. “Obviously, further custody arrangements with respect to her will have to be thought of and worked out by the learned Court in due course,” it added.

The mother has contested the order, claiming that the child is not safe with the father for the duration specified. The bench declared, “However, since it is unreservedly admitted before us by both sides that the child has been with the father from 05.05.2025 until now; and since, as we have said above, the order itself provides that the child will be brought back to the court on 27.05.2025, we find little cause for us to intervene at this stage.”

The court noted that the Family Court will consider any further arrangements for the kid, including temporary custody, on 27th May, following notice to both parties.

The bench then concluded, “This appeal is thus dismissed; however, we deem it necessary that the learned Family Courts are directed not to create arrangements with respect to custody of children, be that permanent or interim, involving police stations in any manner. We direct the Registrar General of this court to ensure that these directions are made known to all the Judges of learned Family Courts peremptorily.”

Background of the case

The case stemmed from the custody of 9-year-old boy. At first, both parties agreed that the mother should have custody. Later, the father demanded full custody and accused the mother of breaking the arrangement. Afterward, the Family Court changed the decision, granting the father custody while providing the mother with limited temporary custody.

The mother approached the high court to argue that the child was experiencing emotional anguish and was not willing to go along with the father. The boy was taken to the judges’ room at one session, where he clung to his mother and avoided talking to his father. However, the father stated that the child’s aversion was a result of the mother’s tutoring.

The child, who was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), had been particularly susceptible to emotional distress brought on by frequent court appearances, the court stated in the earlier ruling. His faith in the court system was further damaged when it was revealed that another bench made a promise that he would not be summoned again.

In the end, the mother’s appeal was granted by the high court, which also restored the original custody ruling in her favor. In order to lessen the emotional toll on the kid, it was also mandated that future custody disputes be held in Mahatma Mandiram rather than the Munsiff Court in Kannur.

News