‘Tender age, need for love’: Jharkhand High Court gives mother custody of 4-year-old girl

The bench, however, made clear that it was deciding only the question of interim custody and its observations would not affect the family court’s eventual decision on permanent custody.

Child below 5, welfare paramount

The child was about four years and six months old when the high court considered the matter. The bench said her age was relevant to assessing her immediate needs and ability to express an informed preference. It held that her welfare had to remain the central consideration rather than the competing claims of the parents.

Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Sanjay Prasad held that the family court’s order declining interim custody to the mother suffered from ‘perversity’.

The court stressed that custody matters cannot be decided through a purely legalistic approach. It said the child’s comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development, surroundings and moral and ethical well-being are among the factors that must be considered.

The bench also observed that a child’s welfare is determined neither solely by economic affluence nor just by emotional concern, but by balancing all relevant factors to secure the child’s total wellbeing. The judgment did not say that the IVF matter, by itself, determined the custody issue, but referred to it while taking various factors into consideration.

Family court’s approach flawed

The high court’s principal concern was whether the family court had properly decided the mother’s specific application seeking interim custody. It held that the family court had not properly adjudicated the application under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act, which empowers a court to make orders concerning interim custody. Instead, the family court had focused on the child’s need for the love and affection of both parents and dealt with the matter primarily through visitation.

The high court said this approach was erroneous and held that the family court’s order declining interim custody to the mother suffered from “perversity” and could not be sustained. It, hence, quashed and set aside the November 2025 order.

Father allowed weekend visitation

While giving interim custody to the mother, the high court did not exclude the father from the child’s life. It said the father would be entitled to meet the child on weekends between 10 am and 5 pm. The meetings can take place at a mutually agreed location or at a place directed by the family court.

The court further directed that the visitation arrangements should not hamper the child’s studies. The family court was given liberty to regulate, modify or vary the visitation terms depending on the circumstances, while keeping the child’s welfare as the paramount consideration.

The high court directed the family court to take effective steps to ensure that the child’s interim custody was handed over to the mother within a week. It also directed the family court to decide the pending main custody proceedings expeditiously and without unnecessary adjournments.