ABSTRACT

The Child Custodianship actions are brought forward either during or following the dissolution of marriage or separation by the court. The laws governing who shall obtain the custodial rights of the child fluctuates according to the personal laws nonetheless the fundamental aim associated with the custody is inevitably exactly the same, that is, wellbeing and optimum advantage of the child. The following research study explores and covers the legal provisions and methods for establishing and exercising child visitation and custody rights within different personal statutes. The study paper goes on to look into legal interpretations provided by the court in multiple cases.

INTRODUCTION

Marriage sometimes does not work out seamlessly, and this contributes to the disintegration of the wedlock between the two spouses, which may ultimately give rise to annulment of marriage or else separation. However, the children conceived from their union with each other endure immensely as an outcome of their parents spilt or disunion from each other. The children are forced to face the harrowing reality of parental separation and may suffer from emotional or psychological trauma as a result.

The divorce may terminate the marriage bond between the two individuals nevertheless their responsibilities as parental figures for their children does not. The legal obligation of the parents to contribute to their children’s economic sustenance, including education; enforceable in both civil and criminal circumstances. To put it mildly, without a doubt child custody is one of the most challenging facets of a separation or divorce.

CONCEPT OF CHILD CUSTODY

Ever since the recognition of concept of divorce by personal laws, the Court is faced with the dilemma to identify a viable approach to deal with the post-divorce state of children. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the definition of the term “custody” is stated as “the care and control”[1] and the definition of the term is stated as “care, control, and maintenance of a child awarded by the Court to either one of the parents in a divorce or separation proceeding”[2].

Generally, custody refers to the right vested in either one of the parents by the court to take care and look after the child, if the child is of age less than eighteen years old. In the case of Hewer v. Bryant[3], the Court recognized the dual nature of custody and stated the custody includes the “power to control education, the choice of religion of the child and the administration of infant’s property. Custody includes both personal as well as physical power to control the infant”.

However, even though the custody of the child is given to one of the parents, the right of another parent is not denied absolutely. In cases of custody, the other parent is provided the visitation right to meet and interact with the child in manner and at time fixed by the Court.

KINDS OF CHILD CUSTODY

1. Physical Custody of the Child –

When a parent is granted physical custody, the kid is placed under the custodianship and care of one of the parents, and the other parent is granted permission to meet with the child on a regular basis. This is the most common approach of ensuring that the child receives all of the benefits of family and has the finest possible upbringing.

2. Co-parenting / Joint Child Custody –

In situation of joint custody or co-parenting, both parents have custody rights, allowing them to keep the kid alternately. Contrary to misconception, joint custody does not imply that the separated couple must continue to live under the same roof even after the courts have approved their divorce or judicial separation but they together take care of the child.

3. Sole Custody / Domicile –

In the instance of sole custody, one biological parent has complete custody rights over the kid. Due to any such reason which makes the other parent unfit or ineligible, the other parent is fully excluded and denied any rights to the child.

4. Third Part Custody –

In third party custody, neither of the biological parents has custody rights. This is because the court believes that both parents are unable of rearing a kid and that granting any of them parental rights would be detrimental to the well-being of the child. The right to be the child’s guardian is granted to a third person who is linked to the parents in some manner.

CHILD CUSTODY UNDER HINDU LAW

In Hindu Law, the understanding of the concept of child custodianship and guardianship is described under Section 26[4] of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘HMA of 1955’). The applicant, that is the petitioner, shall make an application for custodial rights of the child under the Section 26 of HMA Act, 1955 before the Family Court within its jurisdiction.

In any lawsuit brought pursuant to the HMA of 1955, as per the provisions of Section 26, the Court may pass such interim orders and make any such changes in the court’s ruling that the Court considers “just and proper” taking into consideration the wishes of the children, as far as possible, for matters pertaining to the following matters –

1. the custody
2. the maintenance
3. the education of children

The child must be a minor (here, the term “minor” means a person who has not attained majority as defined under Indian Majority Act, 1875).  The applicant may also file a petition before the family court after a decree has been passes for any lawsuit brought under the HMA Act of 1955 for the abovementioned matters and the Court shall pass orders as it deems fit. Additionally, Section 26[5] provides the Court, the power to amend, alter and revoke the decree or order passed. Hence, Section 26 enables the Court to render a verdict on a child’s custody obligations and to withdraw a child’s custody rights for any sufficient cause.

The application filed under Section 26 of the HMA of 1955 must be processed and resolved within sixty days from the effective date of service of the notice to the respondent of the application filed by the applicant.

It is the general condition that the custody of a minor kid who has not yet attained the age of five years old shall be given to mother, the reason being that the minor kid under age of five years is of a tender age and it is believed that they can be best taken care by their mother. However, in those cases where due to any reason the court is of the view that it is not in the well-being of a minor child who has not attained five years of age to be in care of his or her mother then the custody can be given to the father.

Hence, the Court while determining the question of custody of a child, refer to the following matters –

1. Welfare of the minor kid –

Section 13[6] of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (hence referred to as the ‘Hindu Guardianship Act’) makes the general well-being of a child who is minor the primary concern whenever the Court appoints a guardian. Moreover, under Section 13, no individual is entitled to be assigned as a guardian in case the Court feels that that their presence is unlikely to be beneficial to the well-being of the child. Section 25[7] of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 provides the similar provision to take into consideration the well-being and welfare of the minor kid while giving custody.

In Smt. Radha Bai v. Surendra K. Mudaliar[8], the Court stated that while determining custody, the Court shall only analyze the facts and circumstances of each case in light of the welfare of the minor child.

2. Wishes of the parents of minor kid –

Generally, the Courts take into consideration the wishes of minor kid’s parents in the below mentioned two situations[9] –

1. when the issue in question exists between the parent of the child and any other third party
2. when the issue in question exists between the two parents of the child

In the case of Fulkumari v. Budh Singh[10], the Court accentuated that, even if the nature of the minor’s parents’ wishes is decisive, regard must be given to them. However, the concern shall be discarded if it is detrimental to the child’s well-being.

3. Wishes of the minor kid –

Over time, Indian courts have taken careful consideration of an infant’s preferences or wishes alongside determining custody, granted that the child has the capability of expressing its intelligent choice. The child is required to be show enough intellectual growth or maturity to express its preferences. However, the child’s well-being takes precedence, and if the child’s well-being is jeopardized, the Court is entitled to reject the child’s preferences.

In the case of Murarilal v. Saraswati[11], the Indian Court established that the wishes of the children are of significant consideration, and the age at which the kid is capable of expressing his intellectual preferences is determined by the child’s cognitive development or maturity. The court however rejected the views of the child in the case of Venkatarama Ayyangar v. Thulasi Ammal[12] due to the fact they became convinced by way of prominent persuasiveness and were even tortured. Thus, the court of law believes that the child’s preferences are a relevant issue, but not more important than the child’s wellbeing.

4. Age and Sex of the minor kid –

The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act of 1956, provides a legislative clause specifying that male children above the age of sixteen and female children over the age of fourteen shall not be induced to reside in the custody to which they object.

CHILD CUSTODY UNDER MUSLIM LAW

The right to custody is known as “Hizanat” in Muslim law and can be asserted against the father or any additional individual. The mother of the child possesses the first-degree right of custody under Muslim law, and she shall not be barred from exercising her right of custody and care in compliance with the laws until she becomes disqualified for any reason that is set forth by Muslim law.

It is particularly important to note, however, that in Muslim law, the mother’s right of custody exists only for the “well-being and care” of the kid and is not an absolute right[13], which means she cannot exercise her right in any way she sees appropriate.

If any of mother’s action or behavior is found to be disadvantageous for the well-being of the child then she can be deprived of her right of custody. Further, the right of custody of mother over her children continues to function irrespective of the fact whether her children are legitimate or illegitimate.

In case of Zynab Bi Alias Bibijan vs Mohammad Ghouse Mohideen[14], the Court stated that it is not open to the mother, using the right of hizanat, to take the children to wherever she pleases, depriving the father of his natural and legal right to control and supervision over his children.

1. CUSTODY OF SON

The law among Hanafis about the hizanat of the son is that the mother has the right of custody of her son until the son reaches the age of seven years. The mother’s claim to custody over her son culminates when he reaches the age of seven.

Shia Muslims, on the other hand, hold the view that a mother’s right to custody over her son will continue until the child reaches the age of two years, which is regarded to be the age at which the child is weaned. During this time, the mother’s right to custody may not be revoked unless by her own permission. The mother’s entitlement to custody ends when the child reaches the age of two years.

For Malikis, the right of custody for mother over her son continues to exists till the son reaches the age of puberty. Among Shafis and Hanabalis, the rule of custody of mother over son is same as that of Hanafis, the only change is that when the son reaches age of seven years, he has the choice to continue residing with the mother.

2. CUSTODY OF DAUGHTER

The law among Hanafis about the hizanat of the daughter is that the mother has the right of custody of her daughter until the daughter reaches the age of puberty. The mother’s claim to custody over her daughter culminates when she reaches puberty.

For Malikis, Shafis and Hanabalis, the right of custody for mother over her daughter is retained by her, till the daughter remains unmarried. After the daughter the married, the right of custody of mother over her daughter ceases to exists. Among Ithna Asharis Muslims, the mother’s right to custody for her daughter continues to function till the daughter has completed seven years of age.

3. OTHER FEMALES RIGHT OF CUSTODY

After the mother the below mentioned females are entitled to the right of custody of a minor child in Hanafis[15] –

1. Mother’s mother how high so ever
2. Father’s mother how high so ever
3. Full Sister
4. uterine Sister
5. Consanguine sister
6. Full sister’s daughter
7. Uterine sister’s daughter
8. Consanguine sister’s daughter
9. Maternal aunts in like order as sisters and
10. Paternal aunts, in like order as sisters
11. FATHER’S RIGHT OF CUSTODY

Father’s right to custody of his minor child exists in the following cases –

1. on the completion of the age of the minor child up to which the mother or any other female is entitled to have the custody
2. in absence of mother or any other female who is entitled to have the custody

The law among Shafis and Hanabalis appears to be that the father has the right of custody over the children until they get married. The father has right to hizanat but he shall not deprive the mother or any other female from practicing her right of custody to the age which she is entitled to. Father is deemed to be the natural guardian under Muslim law. However, a child cannot be compelled to stay with his or her father in case residing with the father is unsuitable. 

According to the High Court in the case of Athar Hussain vs Syed Siraj Ahmed & Ors[16], simply because the father has love and devotion for his children and is not otherwise demonstrated unsuitable to care for them, it cannot be assumed that the children’s welfare would be taken care of once possession is granted to him.

5. OTHER MALES RIGHT OF CUSTODY

In all such cases when the father is not present, the below mentioned males are entitled to the right of custody of a minor child in Hanafis –

1. Nearest paternal grandfather
2. Full brother
3. Consanguine brother
4. Full brother’s son
5. Consanguine brother’s father
6. Full brothers of the father
7. Consanguine brother of the father
8. Father’s brother’s son and
9. Father’s consanguine brother’s son

WHEN RIGHT OF CUSTODY IS LOST BY FEMALE (HAZINA)

Under Muslim Law, the female who is entitled to the custody of the minor child is known as “hazina”. In the case of Amar Illahi v. Rashida[17], it was observed that a hazina’s poor condition due to poverty or her want for fund for the purpose of maintaining and taking care of the child does not deprive her of the right to hizanat over the child. A hazina loses her right to custody over the children in the following cases –

1. Apostasy of the hazina
2. Subsequent marriage of the hazina with a person not related the child within the degrees of prohibited relationship
3. Removal of the child by the hazina herself

In Musstt. Rahima Khatoon vs Musstt. Saburjanessa And Ors.[18], the mother lost guardianship of her minor daughter once she remarried with an individual who was not related to the child within the prohibited degrees of kinship. In this instance, the court gave the maternal grandmother guardianship over the minor’s person and property.

WHEN RIGHT OF CUSTODY IS LOST BY MALE (HAZIN)

Under Muslim Law, the male who is entitled to the custody of the minor child is known as “hazin”. Though under Muslim law, the law givers have not laid down any specific grounds for disqualification of a hazin for the custody over a child, it can be understood that in all such cases wherein the hazin is of unsound mind or lives an immoral life or who is profligate has no right to custody over the child. Further, as per the general rule if residing with the hazin is not in well-being or advantageous for the child then also the hazin can be deprives of his custodial rights over the child.

CHILD CUSTODY UNDER CHRISTIAN LAW

In Christian Law, the understanding of the concept of child custodianship and guardianship is described under Section 41-44 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (hereinafter referred to as “Divorce Act”). Section 41 of the Divorce Act deals with the custody of child in the cases of judicial separation and Section 43 of the Divorce Act deals with the custody of child in the cases of marriage dissolution and decree for nullity of marriage.

According to Section 41[19], in the suit for judicial separation and Section 43[20] in the suit marriage dissolution and decree for nullity of marriage respectively, the Court has the power to pass any such interim order as it deems fit in regards to following matters –

1. custody of the child
2. maintenance of the child
3. education of the child

The application filed under Section 41 of the Divorce Act must be processed and resolved within sixty days from the effective date of service of the notice to the respondent of the application filed by the applicant.

The applicant may file an application for the above-mentioned matters after the decree for judicial separation had passes and the Court may under Section 42[21] of the Divorce Act pass all such orders in regards to the minor child of the spouses who are subject to the decree. Similarly, the applicant may file an application for the above-mentioned matters after the decree for dissolution of marriage or nullity of marriage had passes and the District Court may under Section 44[22] of the Divorce Act pass all such orders in regards to the minor child of the spouses who are subject to the decree.

CHILD CUSTODY UNDER PARSI LAW

Among Parsi community, the understanding of custodianship and guardianship rights is stipulated under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. According to Section 7(1)[23] of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, if the Court is satisfied that it is in the best interests of a minor to make an order for the following matters –

1. appointing a guardian of his person or property, or both
2. declaring a person to be such a guardian, the Court may do so

According to Section 17(1)[24] of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, when appointing or declaring a minor’s guardian, the Court shall be guided by precisely what is apparent from the particulars to be for the minor’s welfare, consistent with the law to which the minor is subject. Under sub-section (2)[25] of Section 27, the following factors are to be considered by the Court –

1. age of the minor
2. sex of the minor
3. religion of the minor
4. the character and capacity of the guardian
5. the guardian’s nearness of kin to the minor
6. the wishes, if any, of a deceased parent
7. any existing or previous relations of the guardian with the minor or his property

The Courts shall take into consideration, the infant’s preferences or wishes alongside determining custody, granted that the child has the capability of expressing its intelligent choice. The child is required to be show enough intellectual growth or maturity to express its preferences.

PROVISION UNDER SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT, 1954

Under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1954’), the provision related to the custodianship rights of a child is laid down under Section 38[26] of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Section 38 of the Act of 1954 deals with the cases of child custody in the below-mentioned matters-

1. Chapter V of the Act of 1954 i.e., the provisions for the restitution of conjugal rights and judicial separation
2. Chapter VI of the Act of 1954 i.e., the provisions for the nullity of marriage and divorce

As per the provisions laid down in the Section 38 of the Act of 1954, the Court may pass such interim orders and make any such changes in the court’s ruling that the Court considers “just and proper” taking into consideration the wishes of the children, as far as possible, for matters pertaining to the following matters –

1. the custody of the children
2. the maintenance of the children
3. the education of children

In addition to pass order for the above-mentioned matters, the Court also have the power to revoke, suspend or vary the orders passed by the Court in relation to above-mentioned matters. The application filed under Section 38 of the Act of 1954, must be processed and resolved within sixty days from the effective date of service of the notice to the respondent of the application filed by the petitioner by the Court.

CUSTODY TO THIRD PERSON

In general, the custody vest in either one of the parents however taking into consideration the well-being and advantage of the minor kid, the court is entitled to give the custody of the kid to a third party rather than the parents. In the case of Baby v. Vijai[27], the Court said unequivocally that even if the father of two young children was not determined to be unfit, custody of those children should be granted to a third party for their welfare.

CUSTODY IN LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP

A live-in relationship is a partnership akin to marriage in which both parties share a residence but are not legally married to each other. However, it has been observed that these live-in couples produce kids without choosing to wed. The birth of an infant to such live-in couples generates a number of hurdles regarding the child’s and the parent’s rights and responsibilities. One of the aforementioned worries is the custody of such a child if the live-in spouse decides to end their cohabitation arrangement. Although the absence of any regulation makes it easier to enter into such cohabitation arrangements but at the same time it also creates difficulties. Custody focuses on the well-being and security of the child that arise as a result of the end of a relationship or separation.

Due to the failure of any established laws for cases of live-in relationships, the court usually presupposes existence of marriage in long-term live-in relationships, especially in dealing with the custodianship of the children. In the case of Badri Prasad vs Dy. Director of Consolidation and Ors.[28], wherein a man and woman cohabitated together as a married couple for a period of fifty years, the court recognized long term live-in relationship as a married couple. It can be assumed that if an issue relating to child custody arises, it can be dealt with in a similar manner as in the case of marriage.

The Supreme Court acknowledged the legal status for children born in a live-in relationship in the landmark case of Tulsa & Ors vs. Durghatiya & Ors[29]. In this case, the Supreme Court explained that in those cases where the couple cohabits together for a long period of time and are regarded as husband and wife by the society then the child born out of such cohabitation arrangement shall be given legal status. It can be understood that though live-in relationships are not considered as valid marriage but any child born out of such cohabitation shall be regarded as legitimate child with a presumption of valid marriage. Hence, the personal marriage laws that are applicable for the purpose of determining the maintenance and custodianship rights of children born out of regular marriages, is also applicable to children born out of a live-in relationship as well.

VISITATION RIGHTS

When parents separate or divorce from each other, the Court grants the child’s custody to one of the parents for their care and security. In such circumstances, the question arises as to whether the kid should be separated from bonding and associating with the other parent i.e., noncustodial parent? Typically, it happens that when one parent is granted custodial rights, the Court grants the other parent visitation privileges in order to allow access to the kid for interaction. The fundamental idea behind these rights is that the child shall grow up with both parents’ full awareness and company. It is pre-decided and must be followed by the noncustodial and custodial parents diligently. During the visitation rights, it is the duty of the noncustodial parent to ensure that the child is taken care of and his or his well-being or security is not endangered. 

When deciding a noncustodial parent’s visiting rights, the court considers several factors, including:

1. the child’s age
2. holidays such as weekends, government holidays, and so on.
3. The distance between the two parents’ homes.

If the custodial parent files a complaint or an injunction in court to deny the noncustodial parent visiting rights, the court may give them on the justified grounds. The court might set up a hearing to determine if the noncustodial parent is unfit to have visitation rights with the kid owing to his or her abusive character or his or her potential to impact the youngster immorally.

In the instance of Dr. V. Ravi Chandran v. Union of India & others[30], a US court granted a divorce to an Indian couple and granted them joint custody of their child. The child was taken to India by the wife, depriving the father of shared custody. The Supreme Court of India ordered the wife to return to the United States in order to give her husband equal custody of their kid.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that in India, family courts are governed by the theory of “Parens Patriae” which indicates that the court is bound to make a judgement while maximizing the child’s wellbeing and security. Child custody can occasionally be an object of divergence between the feuding spouses. In the event of a minor kid, after divorce, both parents enjoy equal custody of the child. If there is no mutual agreement, the family courts decide who gets to retain the kid and make significant life decisions for him or her.

There has been significant disagreement between numerous personal laws and the uniform legislation created by the State. However, the debate over alternative legal perspectives should not jeopardize the child’s future. While resolving various sections of law, it should be recalled that the main purpose for child custody is the kid’s welfare as well as secured social security.

REFERENCES

1. BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY- Definitions of the Terms and Phrases of American and English Jurisprudence, Ancient and Modern by Henry Campbell Black, revised Fifth Edition by St. Paul, Minn. West Publishing Co. 1979
2. 2. Paras Diwan, FAMILY LAW (12^th edition) (Allahabad Law Agency 2022)
3. Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956
4. Guardian and Wards Act, 1890
5. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
6. Divorce Act, 1869
7. Special Marriage Act, 1954
8. Fulkumari v. Budh Singh, (1914) 25 IC 122
9. Murarilal v. Saraswati, AIR 1925 Lah 375
10. Venkatarama Ayyangar v. Thulasi Ammal, AIR 1950 Mad 320
11. Baby v. Vijai, AIR 1992 Ker 289
12. Zynab Bi Alias Bibijan vs Mohammad Ghouse Mohideen AIR 1952 Mad 284
13. Athar Hussain vs Syed Siraj Ahmed & Ors, Civil Appeal No.11 of 2010
14. Amar Illahi v. Rashida, PLD (1955) Lah 501
15. Musstt. Rahima Khatoon vs Musstt. Saburjanessa And Ors., AIR 1996 Gau 33
16. Smt. Radha Bai v. Surendra K. Mudaliar, AIR 1971 Mys. 69
17. Dr. V. Ravi Chandran v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 112/2007
18. Badri Prasad vs Dy. Director of Consolidation and Ors., 1978 AIR 1557
19. Tulsa & Ors vs. Durghatiya & Ors., Appeal (civil) 648 of 2002
20. Hewer v. Bryan, (1969) 3 All ER 578

WEBLIOGRAPHY

1. Who gets Child’s Custody after divorce? – https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/legal/will/who-gets-childs-custody-after-a-divorce/a-bone-of-contention/slideshow/92761559.cms (last visited on 21 April 2023)
2. Child-Custody Adjudication: Judicial Functions In The Face Of Indeterminacy – https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3457&context=lcp (last visited on 19 April 2023)
3. Child Custody Laws after divorce in India – https://lawrato.com/indian-kanoon/child-custody-law/child-custody-laws-in-india-2691 (last visited on 22 April 2023)
4. Steps for Custody of Child under Hindu Law! – https://restthecase.com/knowledge-bank/tips/steps-for-custody-of-a-child-under-hindu-law (last visited on 20 April 2023)
5. Custody of Children: Section 26 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – https://www.tutorialspoint.com/custody-of-children-section-26-of-the-hindu-marriage-act-1955 (last visited on 20 April 2023)

[1]BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY- Definitions of the Terms and Phrases of American and English Jurisprudence, Ancient and Modern by Henry Campbell Black, revised Fifth Edition by St. Paul, Minn. West Publishing Co. 1979

[2] BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY- Definitions of the Terms and Phrases of American and English

Jurisprudence, Ancient and Modern by Henry Campbell Black, revised Fifth Edition by St.

Paul, Minn. West Publishing Co. 1979

[3] (1969) 3 All ER 578

[4] Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, § 26, No.25, Acts of Parliament, 1955 (India)

[5] Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, § 26, No.25, Acts of Parliament, 1955 (India)

[6] Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, § 13, No.32, Acts of Parliament, 1955 (India)

[7] Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, § 25, No.08, Acts of Parliament, 1890 (India)

[8] AIR 1971 Mys. 69

[9] Dr. Paras Diwan, FAMILY LAW (12^th edition) (Allahabad Law Agency 2022)

[10] (1914) 25 IC 122

[11] AIR 1925 Lah 375

[12] AIR 1950 Mad 320

[13] Dr. Paras Diwan, FAMILY LAW (12^th edition) (Allahabad Law Agency 2022)

[14] AIR 1952 Mad 284

[15] Dr. Paras Diwan, FAMILY LAW (12^th edition) (Allahabad Law Agency 2022)

[16] Civil Appeal No.11 of 2010

[17] PLD (1955) Lah 501

[18] AIR 1996 Gau 33

[19] The Divorce Act, 1869, § 41, No.04, Acts of Parliament, 1869 (India)

[20] The Divorce Act, 1869, § 43, No.04, Acts of Parliament, 1869 (India)

[21] The Divorce Act, 1869, § 42, No.04, Acts of Parliament, 1869 (India)

[22] The Divorce Act, 1869, § 44, No.04, Acts of Parliament, 1869 (India)

[23] Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, § 7, No.08, Acts of Parliament, 1890 (India)

[24] Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, § 17, No.08, Acts of Parliament, 1890 (India)

[25] Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, § 17, No.08, Acts of Parliament, 1890 (India)

[26] Special Marriage Act, 1954, § 38, No.43, Acts of Parliament, 1954 (India)

[27] AIR 1992 Ker 289

[28] 1978 AIR 1557      

[29] Appeal (civil) 648 of 2002

[30] Writ Petition (Crl.) No.112/2007