MUMBAI, March 10: Ten-year old Shravan Dave can now stay with his father and step-mother, thanks to Bombay High Court which ruled that the boy cannot be compelled to stay with the maternal grandparents after the mother's mysterious death.Seven years of litigation over the custody of the boy came to an end when the High Court dismissed the appeal of the grandparents who sought Sharavan's custody. The grandparents have alleged that their daughter was killed by her husband and therefore the child cannot remain in the father's custody.
But, upholding an earlier family court order, the division bench of Justice Ashok Agarwal and Ranjana Desai ruled that any compulsory association with the grandparents would be ``psychologically inadvisable''.
The judges said they have conducted in-camera interviews with the boy who was ``smart and candid enough'' to communicate his liking. His father and step-mother were also interviewed and they seemed genuinely concerned about Shravan's welfare. The step-mother feltthat any disturbance in the custody can affect the boy's career prospects which seemed brilliant now.
Shravan's custody became a controversial issue ever since the death of his mother Sonal Dave, in 1991. According to Sonal's parents, she did not commit suicide as claimed by her husband. Therefore, Shravan's parents filed a complaint against the husband. The husband now faces prosecution under two sections of the Indian Penal Code, which is still subject to final verdict. The parents alleged that their daughter was being ill-treated and harassed for dowry. But her husband said Sonal was a victim of chronic depression.After filing the police complaint, Sonal's parents moved the family court for the custody of the child. They said the paternal side was unable to give affection and care to the child, and that the bond between them and the young boy necessitates a change in custody.
However, the family court counsellors found a different picture. One of the counsellors observed, ``Even the access given tothe grandparents should be stopped as it is being used as a weapon for harassment without any genuine concern for the child.''
The counsellor also found that Shravan's father was a well-to-do businessman. He owns two companies with a turnover of Rs 50 lakh.
As against this, the maternal side is not economically sound. The grandfather was a retired person and the grandmother a housewife. And the couple's parents were also not gainfully employed. Therefore, the grandparents' claim to custody was baseless, the court ruled.
The family court also observed that whenever the child was brought near the grandparents, he was either scared or disinterested. He refused to move from his father's lap. He never looked forward to the meetings with the grandparents and always wanted his father in the background.
Copyright © 1998 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
