SUPREME COURT REVERSES ITS CUSTODY ORDER, RETURNS 13-YEAR-OLD TO MOTHER AS CHILD MENTAL HEALTH DETERIORATED

In an unusual yet significant move, the Supreme Court has reversed its own Order of granting custody of a 13-year-old boy to his father, instead restoring permanent custody to the mother. The decision came in light of compelling psychological evidence and fresh developments that pointed to the child’s deteriorating mental health after separation from his mother.

Originally, the custody battle had culminated in an August 2024 Supreme Court ruling upholding the Kerala High Court’s decision to award permanent custody to the father. However, that ruling has now been overturned following a Review Petition filed by the mother, who presented fresh psychological reports indicating the child was suffering from acute anxiety after being placed in the father’s custody.

The case titled N v. R (Civil Appeal Nos. 5395-5396 of 2024) (Date of Decision: 15.07.2025) was decided by a bench comprising Justices Prasanna B. Varale and Vikram Nath, who emphasized that while the Court’s power to review its Judgments is limited, such authority must be exercised when significant new evidence surfaces—particularly in sensitive matters such as child custody.

Factual Background

The parents married in 2011 and had a son in 2012. Due to on-going marital issues, they decided to divorce by mutual consent in 2015. As part of the settlement, they agreed the child would stay with the mother, while father was granted visitation rights twice a month.

Post-divorce, the mother remarried and had another child. She resided in Thiruvananthapuram with her new family. Between 2016 and 2019, father claimed to have had no contact with the child, learning of the mother’s remarriage and her plans to relocate to Malaysia only when she approached him in 2019, in order to obtain consent the child’s passport.

Opposing the move, the father approached the Family Court in Kerala seeking permanent custody. The Family Court, however, ruled in favour of the mother in October 2022, granting her custody and allowing the child to travel abroad during holidays, while giving the father limited visitation rights. Dissatisfied, the father appealed to the Kerala High Court, which on October 17, 2023, reversed the Family Court’s decision. It granted the father permanent custody, citing concerns that relocating the child to Malaysia might not serve his best interests.

The mother then moved the Supreme Court, which initially upheld the High Court’s Judgment in August 2024, dismissing her Appeal. The Court, at that stage, did not find sufficient grounds to interfere with the High Court’s decision.

The Turning Point: New Evidence Emerges

Soon after the Supreme Court’s decision, the mother filed a Review Petition, supported by fresh psychological assessments. A report dated September 3, 2024, from a clinical psychologist noted the child was experiencing significant anxiety and showed symptoms consistent with Separation Anxiety Disorder. The child, then aged 11, was reportedly distressed by the custody change and feared being separated permanently from his mother.

In her Petition, the mother also alleged that the father had made intimidating remarks to the child—threatening to cut off his access to the mother—further worsening the child’s psychological condition. These allegations were followed by four additional psychological evaluations, all of which confirmed the child’s continuing emotional distress and attachment to the mother.

Court’s Decision

Upon reviewing the new reports, the Court determined that the said reports constituted crucial new evidence that could not have been presented earlier and had a direct bearing on the welfare of the child. The Judges highlighted the need for flexibility in custody matters, pointing out that strict legal frameworks cannot override a child’s evolving psychological and emotional needs.

“there is no room for doubt that in matters of custody, the best interest of the child remains at the heart of judicial adjudication and a factor adversely impacting the child’s welfare undeniably becomes a matter of such nature that has a direct bearing on the decision with the possibility to change it. Therefore, in the wake of new facts as detailed above, the review petitions at hand are deemed worth entertaining under Article 137 of the Constitution of India and require indulgence of this Court”. The Court observed.

The Court noted that while the father expressed a desire to reconnect, the child viewed him as a “stranger” and had not spent even a night in his care. In contrast, the child saw the mother as his primary caregiver, and psychological reports confirmed that he derived comfort and stability from her presence. The boy had lived exclusively with his mother since he was 11 months old and considered her new husband and half-sibling as part of his immediate family. The Court further stated, that custody decisions must be guided by the unique facts of each case.

In light of these findings, the Supreme Court allowed the mother’s review petition and set aside the August 2024 judgment and the Kerala High Court’s October 2023 order. It reinstated the Family Court’s October 2022 decision granting permanent custody to the mother, with certain modifications to the visitation schedule.

Under the new arrangement, the father will retain virtual and physical visitation rights. However, the mother cannot relocate the child outside India, except during the Onam and Christmas holidays and for half of the summer vacation. She must provide prior intimation to both the Family Court and the father before such travel.

The Court further directed both parents to engage in regular psychological counselling and ordered a fresh assessment of the child’s psychological state to be conducted by CMC, Vellore, by October 31, 2025.

While refraining from passing judgment on the alleged threats made by the father, the Court issued a clear caution, urging him to avoid making any remarks that could traumatize the child. It also advised both parents to work towards rebuilding trust and maintaining open communication, stressing that the child’s emotional well-being must not be compromised by past disputes.

Conclusion

This ruling marks a notable departure from rigid legal interpretations, reflecting the Supreme Court’s willingness to adapt to evolving circumstances. By placing the child’s emotional health at the center of the judicial process, the Court has underscored the need for a compassionate and child-focused approach in family law matters.

 

Yash Hari Dixit

Associate

The Indian Lawyer and Allied Services

Editor’s Comments

Courts in India have always considered the best interests of the child when deciding matters pertaining to guardianship, custody, adoption etc. Indian judges have made tremendous effort to understand the child psychology before granting the final relief to the parent. Even at the Supreme Court level, judges have called minor children to their chambers to understand the child’s preference when the child’s custody is sought by both parents. The present case is an example of the Court’s concern of the best interests of the child.

Sushila Ram Varma

Advocate and Chief Legal Consultant

The Indian Lawyer and Allied Services

 

Please log onto our YouTube channel, The Indian Lawyer Legal Tips, to learn about various aspects of the law. Our latest Video, titled Uniform Civil Code Explained | Pros, Cons & Constitutional Perspective | Advocate Sushila Ram Varma | can be viewed at the link below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKJgw5k4kQU&t=626s