Courts have to safeguard family system which is fast eroding: Madras High Court

Courts have to safeguard the family system in the country which is fast eroding, the Madras High Court recently said while dealing with an case relating to granting visitation rights to the grandparents of a minor girl [A Aashifa Begum vs Khader Beevi]..A division bench of R Mahadevan and Mohammed Shaffiq also underlined that in custody or guardianship cases, courts must give prime importance to the welfare of the child. "In custody or guardianship matters, the courts have to consider the welfare of the minor child, which is a paramount consideration and to ensure and safeguard family system in the country, which is fast eroding and to ensure that there is overall development of the minor child and there is proper environment and upbringing of the child and therefore, the best interests of the child are taken care," the bench said in its order pronounced on March 5. In the instant case, the bench noted that the minor girl was merely 2.5 years years old and therefore, the mother can claim custody of the child. But at the same time, the grandparents cannot be denied reasonable access or visitation rights, which will also help the child's normal development, the bench made it clear."An affectionate relationship with grandparents is recognised as beneficial for the child. It is to be pointed out at this juncture that the minor child has been under grandparents' cafe since her birth, which was disturbed due to the strained relationship between the parties," the Court observed.However, the Court proceeded to reduce the number of visits from twice a month to once a month. .The Court was hearing an appeal filed by the mother of the minor child, who raised several allegations against her in-laws. She stated that her in-laws 'unjustly' accused her for the illness and subsequent death of her husband and that they spread rumours that she (wife) was "inauspicious." She alleged that her in-laws refused to hand over the child to her and forcibly took away the child from her and upon her request to hand over the child, they threatened to throw the child from the third floor of their house. Further, she alleged that the in-laws neglected the child's health leading to some infection. She also accused her in-laws of forcing her to sign a mediation agreement for their visitation rights and also that the in-laws brought in some 'rowdy' persons and vandalised her parents' house. On the other hand, the grandparents told the Court that they were deeply affected by the death of their son and were further distressed by the actions of their daughter-in-law who took away the child. They submitted that the economic position of their daughter-in-law's parents was very limited and hence allowing the child to live with them would be detrimental, lacking discipline, ethics, values, morals and compassion. The grandparents highlighted the fact that they have more than 2 properties in and around Chennai and thus, will be in a better position to look after all the needs of the child. .After considering the facts, the bench said it was inclined to modify the order of the Family Court granting visitation rights to the grandparents by restricting it to once a month (first Saturday) for fours hours instead of twice a month (two hours each)..Senior Advocate Chitra Sampath along with advocate K Shanker appeared for the mother. Senior Advocate S Prabhakaran along with advocate G Anandaraj represented the grandparents. .[Read Judgment]