Case Brief: Purvi Mukesh Gada V.Mukesh Popatlal Gada

Name of the Case	Purvi Mukesh Gada V. Mukesh Popatlal Gada
Citation	2017 INSC 846
Date of the Judgement	04.09.2017
Petitioner	Purvi Mukesh Gada
Respondent	Mukesh Popatlal Gada
Bench/ Judges	A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.
Statutes Involved	Indian Penal Code, 1860
Important Articles/ Sections	IPC- Section 498A

FACTS OF THE CASE

The appellant and respondent got married in 1997 according to Hindu rites. Their marriage was solemnized. They lived together for more than 15 years. They had two children out of wedlock. The appellant left the matrimonial home in 2013. As per the appellant’s allegations, she had suffered from mental and physical torture at the hands of the respondent since the beginning of the marriage. She continued to live with the respondent because of financial dependency. 

When the respondent left her matrimonial home, and came to her parents' house. Their first child was living in the boarding school. And the husband did not allow her to take the girl with her. Some attempts were made to settle the dispute, but they did not bear any results. In 2014, the appellant-wife filed a case of domestic abuse on the grounds of mental and physical cruelty, including verbal and physical abuse and occult practices. Three months after the said application, the appellant-wife moved an application for access to her minor children during Christmas vacation.

After some time, their second child was also admitted to the boarding school by the respondent. At that juncture, the appellant moved an application for interim custody of the minor children as well as for maintenance. However, the custody was not allowed as it was prayed in the middle of the academic year; however, an order for interim maintenance was passed for 30,000 Rs. per month. 

When in May, the summer vacations were approaching, the appellant filed an application for the custody of the children for half of the vacation. While this application was pending, the respondent himself gave the custody of the children to the appellant for the period of three days. However, after the expiry of the said period, the children were not returned to the respondent. They themselves refused to go back, according to the appellant. The respondent filed an application before the court of the additional ACMM for restoration of custody, alleging that the appellant’s intentions were bad. The court interacted with the children and thereafter passed an order rejecting the restoration of custody. 

An appeal was filed against this in the Sessions Court, which also dismissed the appeal. The respondent filed the writ petition before the High Court, which ruled in favor of the husband and granted the restoration of the custody of the children. This was challenged in the appeal before the Supreme Court.

PROVISIONS INVOLVED

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 498 A: It deals with matrimonial cruelty

LEGAL ISSUES

The following legal issues were determined by the court:

1. Whether the High Court erred in retaining the custody orders with the respondent?
2. Whether Is it in the welfare of the children if they were to be in the custody of the appellant?

ARGUMENTS FROM THE APPELLANT’S SIDE

The learned counsel from the appellant’s side made the following contention:

1. The appellant-wife refuted the allegations.
2. The children themselves did not want to stay with the respondent. 

ARGUMENTS FROM THE RESPONDENT’S SIDE

The learned counsel from the appellant’s side made the following contention:

1. He maintained that on all the occasions, it was the appellant who had refused to hand over the custody to him.
2. They had repeatedly violated the orders of the High Court.
3. If the custody is retained by the appellant, it would amount to giving her an advantage of her own wrong, as she took unfair advantage of the gracious act of the respondent in voluntarily handing over the custody. 

COURT’S STANCE AND JUDGMENT

The court allowed the appeal.

The bench noted that the eldest child had failed his Class IX examinations and had to reappear for the examinations. It was under the guidance and tuition of the appellant, the child passed and got promoted to Grade X. 

Another fact that the bench noted is that when the appellant left the matrimonial home, the elder child was living in a boarding school and was not residing with the parties. He was not in the physical company of his father on a day-to-day basis. He was not doing well in studies during the period his legal custody was entrusted to the respondent. But after residing with the appellant, his academic performance improved. 

The court noted not the High Court had lightly brushed aside with the observation that if the children were not doing well earlier, blame cannot be put on the respondent, as it could be the result of a dispute.

The court found that the children were of a capable age to understand where their welfare lies. Both children were comfortable in the company of their mother. They even expressed their desire to stay with their mother. The bench also feels that the welfare of the children lies in allowing the appellant to retain the custody of the children. 

The court set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court and restored the order of the sessions court. Moreover, during the Dusshera, Diwali, Christmas vacations, etc., for half the duration, the children will be in the custody of the respondent. 

CONCLUSION

The bench set an important precedent by allowing the appeal where the well-being of the child is considered to be of paramount importance. Although the court allowed the father to visit his children, they mainly remain in the custody of their mother. Moreover, the court underscores the gravity of matrimonial disputes and highlights that it has a negative impact on the health, whether physical or emotional, of the child.