Mr.Rebates

Mr. Rebates

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Court restrains Interpol from taking custody of child from NRI

Friday March 26, 2010,



The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.


A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.

The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.

Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.

However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India, following which the woman moved the apex court. (Custody battle: A child's wait for justice)

In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial disputes involving people of Indian origin.

Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.

Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.

However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not available in other countries. The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Interpol from taking custody of a minor boy from his NRI mother's possession and decided to examine the crucial question whether Indian courts can entertain matrimonial disputes if the couple is foreign citizens.

A Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justices J M Panchal and Deepak Verma directed "status quo" on the custody of the child and posted the matter for further hearing to April 1.

The apex court passed the interim order on an SLP filed by Ruchi Majoo, a dentist and an American now domiciled in Delhi.

Ruchi had filed the SLP through counsel Ashish Bhan against a Delhi High Court order, which had held that since the divorced couple was US citizens, the custodial battle for the child should be fought in that country's court. The high court had passed the order while setting aside the district's order granting custodial rights to the mother.

However, Ruchi's husband, armed with a US court order, sought the help of the Interpol to take custody of the child and came to India, following which the woman moved the apex court.

In an unusual appearance, Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising, on behalf of Ruchi urged, the apex court to take up the matter for early hearing as according to her the issue "was of great significance involving jurisdictional powers of Indian courts" over such matrimonial disputes involving people of Indian origin.

Normally, government counsel, more so those holding high ranking law officer posts like Additional Solicitor Generals, do not appear in private disputes except without the permission of the Attorney General.

Jaising complained the Interpol was attempting to take away the child from the mother's custody and sought a restrain on it.

However, the husband's senior counsel Pallav Sisodia told the Bench that Ruchi had deliberately foisted false cases of 498A (harassment of wife by husband/relatives) against Sanjeev to harass him. He pointed out that there is a growing tendency among such estranged NRI wives to come to India and file false 498A cases as such provisions were not available in other countries.

1 comment:

  1. Irrespective of what the courts have set out, arrests and threat of arrest do happen day in and day out...just on the basis of the woman's word.

    Further The DV act makes marriage a very dangerous proposition in India

    Males are the biggest victims of the marriage industry.

    To add to this Sohaib and a 1000s of others have added to the morass by paying huge ransoms to women who file false cases and harass them

    More rape cases (recent ones, where consensual sex has now become rape) at http://bit.ly/cnt3td

    ReplyDelete