'Mother more interested in career than child’s welfare'

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: An Odisha couple’s child custody dispute spanning Thailand and Germany was decided by the High Court of Karnataka in favour of the father, as the court felt that the mother “is more keen on her career prospects in Germany than the welfare of the child.”

On the other hand, the HC found that the father “was very liberal in his offers and flexible to consider alternative options, if any, whereas, (the wife) was steadfast in her view and expressed a solitary option to remain in Germany and sought for (the child’s) custody.”

A German court in the meantime had ordered that the place of residence of the child would be decided by the mother. However, the High Court said it was an ex-parte order passed while the child was in India.

Moreover, the HC had two private interactions with the child and based on what the nine-year-old child said, decided to give custody to the father.

“In view of the settled position of law in India that the welfare of the child is paramount, for reasons recorded hereinabove and based on the interaction we had with the child, we are of the considered opinion that (the child) is happy in his present environment in Bangkok with his father and hence, the contention with regard to the ex-parte order passed by the German Court is noted only to be rejected,” the division bench of Justice PS Dinesh Kumar and Justice TG Shivashankare Gowda said in their judgement on September 29.

The couple were married in 2013 and both are IT professionals. In 2016, they moved to Bangkok for employment. In 2022, they decided to move to Germany for better prospects.

In July 2023, the father took the child from Germany on a flight to Dubai en route to India. A few days later, the wife complained to the Commissioner of Police in Bengaluru that her husband had abducted their child and requested an FIR.

She also approached the Karnataka Human Rights Commission and the Commission for Protection of Child Rights. She also approached a family court in Germany which gave an ex-parte interim order giving her the right to choose the child’s residence.

She filed a habeas corpus petition in the High Court of Karnataka seeking the child’s custody. The husband’s counsel argued that there were incidents of the wife’s infidelity in Germany, but he was still prepared to take her back if she was prepared to relocate to Bangkok or India.

However, the wife was resolute to stay back in Germany. The wife’s counsel claimed the standard of education in Germany was better than in Thailand.

The Justices had a “long interaction” with the child in the presence of the advocates but without the parents. The court noted that the child was bullied in school in Germany.

Only three of the 29 pupils in his German class were Indians and many teachers did not know English. “In substance, we gathered that Advik was more happy and felt 'at home' in his School in Bangkok,” the HC noted.

After interacting with the child, the HC concluded, “On an overall assessment, we are of the considered opinion that (he) is a brilliant child with a high intelligence quotient and capable of exercising options wisely. He has a good comprehension of contemporary affairs in the world and is very resolute in his views. He expressed in no uncertain terms that he desired to reside with his father in Bangkok.”

The HC handed the custody of the child to the father, subject to any orders of a Jurisdictional Family Court in the future.

The mother was given visitation rights to the child once in three months and to spend time with him on vacation in Thailand, India or any destination by mutual consent. She was also allowed to phone/video call the child twice a week. (WPHC 79/2023)