Man loses interim custody of daughter for failing to give home-cooked food during her stay with him

NEW DELHI: A person misplaced interim custody of his eight-year-old daughter, ordered by Kerala HC to stay with her estranged dad and mom alternatively for 15 days in a month, for not having the ability to present home-cooked food even for a single day during the stay with him.
After interacting with the kid, a bench of SC Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta discovered a number of causes – the woman not getting home-cooked food, separated from her three-year-old brother, and nobody besides father for firm – for quashing the HC order on the bottom that although he’s a doting father, the environment and circumstances at his place isn’t conducive for her.
The man, working at Singapore, had rented out a spot in Thiruvananthapuram and used to fly down each month to be with his daughter.
Writing the judgment, Justice Mehta stated, “Continued consumption of food procured from restaurants/hotels would pose a health hazard, even to a grown-up person, what to talk of a tender aged child of eight years. The child requires nutritious home-cooked food for her overall well-being, growth and development. Unfortunately, the father is not in a position to provide such nutrition to the child.”
SC stated it might have thought-about asking the daddy to present home-cooked food, however “the fact that the child gets no company whatsoever except for that of the father during the interim custody period of 15 days is an additional factor which weighs heavily against his claim for the child’s custody at this stage.”
Finding the mom works from house and has her dad and mom with her, SC stated the woman would get higher firm at mom’s place as well as to the corporate of her brother.
SC additionally frowned on the HC order granting 15-day custody each month of the three year-old son to the person, terming it “grossly unjustified” which might have critical adversarial impact on the emotional and bodily well-being of the son being compelled to be separated from the mom at a young age.
“Hence, the emotional and moral support which the child gets at her mother’s home is manifold than what is being provided by the father during the interim custody period. The period of 15 days during which the daughter would be with the father would also lead to deprivation of her company to her sibling, the boy child aged three years,” it stated.
SC allowed the person to get interim custody of the daughter on alternate Saturdays and Sundays of each month and work together with them on video name two days each week. “On either of these two days, father will be entitled to meet & have interim custody of the child for a period of four hours subject to the comfort of the child and under supervision of a child counsellor,” it stated.