ATHIRA MANGALATHU RAJ Vs. DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. Rakesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. M. Revikrishnan, learned counsel for the 3 rd respondent, and Mr. Biju Meenattoor, learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The minor child is presently pursuing his studies in Canada. Indisputably, when the parents of the child parted ways at Dubai, the child was in the custody of the mother and the private respondent, the 3 rd respondent, left Dubai without claiming any custody of the child. Since then, the child has been in the custody of the mother and the mother had taken all steps to have the child admitted to a school in Canada. The mother appears to have taken good care of the child, providing him quality education and looking after his welfare.

(3.) While the mother came down to India with the child to attend to the medical needs of her father, she, in a good gesture, allowed the custody of the child to the father. The gesture is well appreciated as the mother wanted that there should be a bond between the child and the father, which is essential for the proper development of the child. However, it appears that when the child was about to leave with the mother for Canada and rejoin his studies, the child was not made available to the mother at the airport, which apparently came to her as a rude shock. The mother is a working lady and in order to save her employment, she had to urgently leave India and thereafter pursued this remedy.