Guardianship right of unwed mothers: Is SC enthroning women?


By John B Monteiro

Jul 9: It has long been said that mother is a fact and father fiction. But the fact has worked against mothers or women at large (or loose?). There is a rustic saying that men and women can get into muck and enjoy together but men can wash themselves clean while women, though can wash externally, run the risk of carrying the burden of the seed implanted in the course of unthinking passion and enjoyment. We had a case of a leading politician (also Governor of a State) disowning his biological son born outside marriage for decades. The case has concluded happily for the disowned son and his mother through court procedures which finally involved the risk of DNA test to determine paternity. Now the Supreme Court has, so to say, started a legal process of women enthronement which is beyond the political slogan and scanty action of women empowerment. But, first the facts.

Upholding the right of an unwed mother to apply for sole guardianship over her minor son without prior consent of the child’s absentee biological father, the Supreme Court on July 6, 2015 said women are increasingly choosing to raise their children alone, and there was no need to thrust an uncaring father on a child. The young mother, whom the apex court described as “well-educated, gainfully employed and financially secure,” had refused to divulge the name of the biological father of her child to the courts. She reasoned that the man, who was married and had a family, never showed any interest in her child, whom she raised on her own. She wanted guardianship rights so that her son would inherit her financial assets.

“In situations where the father has not exhibited any concern for his offspring, giving him legal recognition would be an exercise in futility. In today’s society, where women are increasingly choosing to raise their children alone, we see no purpose in imposing an unwilling and unconcerned father on an otherwise viable family nucleus,” the judgment by a Bench of Justices Vikramjit Sen and A.M. Sapre held. The judgment, authored by Justice Sen, observed that a man who has chosen to forsake his duties and responsibilities is not a necessary constituent for the well-being of the child. “Any responsible man would keep track of his offspring and be concerned for the welfare of the child he has brought into the world; this does not appear to be so in the present case,” the apex court held, allowing the mother to apply for guardianship without disclosing the name of the biological father.

The court agreed with the woman, who preferred anonymity and is known only by the acronym ‘ABC’ on court records, that it would be beneficial if the father’s name is not disclosed now. She said the guardianship can be altered if the father raised any objections.

The Supreme Court directed that unwed mothers can get birth certificates issued for their biological children merely by furnishing an affidavit to this effect. In the present case, the legal battle for the woman, a Christian, started in 2011 when the local Guardian Court rejected her application under the Guardians and Wards Act after she refused to part with the father’s details or name. Under Section 11 of the Act, a mother applying for sole guardianship needs prior consent of the biological father. Section 19 goes further to say that a mother cannot be the sole guardian if the father is alive and fit. Her appeal in the Delhi High Court was dismissed for the same reason. In fact, the High Court even reasoned that her status as a single mother could only be determined after hearing from the father too.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the “predominant legal thought across the world and in some statutes in India” is that a mother is best suited to care for her child. The court further made this a strong case for ushering in a Uniform Civil Code. “Christian unwed mothers in India are disadvantaged when compared to their Hindu counterparts, who are the natural guardians of their illegitimate children by virtue of their maternity alone. It would be apposite for us to underscore that our Directive Principles envision the existence of a Uniform Civil Code, but this remains an unaddressed constitutional expectation.”

Though the High Court in this case ruled against this unwed mother, many high courts are taking pro-woman stands, specially in awarding maintenance for divorced wives and their kids, as reflected in the following cases

The Karnataka High Court on June 25, 2015 ruled that a father cannot deny maintenance to his child on the ground that he has a low-wage occupation. The High Court asked the father, a resident of Madikeri, to pay Rs 5,000 as maintenance to his 13-year-old daughter within a month.

In a petition filed before the court, Joseph (name changed) contended that he cannot pay maintenance of Rs 1,000 per month, which the Lok Adalat asked him to pay in 2009, as he is a coolie. Taking serious exception to this, Justice Venugopala Gowda said Joseph should be ashamed of himself. “Why should he have a child if he could not pay maintenance? The minor daughter has no means to take care of herself... The right of the minor girl cannot be sacrificed because of the quarrel between the father and mother,” he added.

“Joseph is claiming that he is not able to pay the maintenance because he is a coolie... But how did he get the money to file an appeal against the Lok Adalat order in the magistrate court and later in the sessions court in Madikeri? How did he mobilise money to come to Bengaluru to file a criminal petition before the High Court seeking to quash the maintenance order,” Justice Gowda asked. “I cannot exercise the powers of Section 482 of CrPC to quash the maintenance order. Instead, I am ordering you to give Rs 5,000 to the minor daughter and this should be paid within a month,” he said

In a similar case, Madurai Bench of Madras High court ruled: A man, though jobless, should pay maintenance to his wife as ordered by court in divorce case. Justice G Rajasuriya said the husband cannot claim that he was poor, in order to dodge his responsibility of providing monthly maintenance to his wife."A husband has to take care of his wife somehow or other even if he is jobless," the Judge said.

He was dismissing a civil revision petition filed by the man challenging the March 3, 2014 order of family court, before which the couple had filed divorce petition, directing him to pay Rs 2,000 as interim maintenance. The man had pleaded that he did not have the source to pay the maintenance ordered by the lower court. In his order, the Judge said: "A hale and healthy man is expected to work to maintain himself and his dependants. He has to maintain his wife who is incapable of maintaining herself. Somehow or other husband should maintain amount granted by the lower court. Besides, the Judge also directed the man to provide Rs 3,000 to his wife for paying the cost of litigation.
.
In another case, the Supreme Court in early April 2015 said that divorced Muslim women are entitled to seek maintenance from their ex-husbands under the Criminal Procedure Code which provides the same relief to wives, children and parents. A bench of justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant referred several judgements of the apex court where law has been settled that a magistrate can grant maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman and parameters and considerations are the same as stipulated in Section 125 of the CrPC. Section 125 of the CrPC deals with order for maintenance for wives, kids and parents if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain them.

Dealing with the issue of applicability of Section 125 CrPC to a Muslim woman who has been divorced, the bench upheld a trial court's order which had directed a man, retired Nayak from Army, to pay Rs 4,000 maintenance to his divorced wife. It said, "there can be no shadow of doubt that Section 125 CrPC has been rightly held to be applicable by the family judge."

The Bombay High Court, also in early April 2015, had taken to task a former MNC official who is involved in a bitter divorce battle and directed him to bear the expenses of his eldest son's education at the United World College of South East Asia in Singapore.

Hearing a plea filed by Ritu Malhotra challenging the family court's verdict directing her to pay 25% of her son's fee on the basis that a property that her parents had given her had been sold for Rs 50 lakh, the HC told her husband Pankaj, "You cannot throw your hands up." The couple's 17-year-old son has been in Singapore since grade 9, and is due to complete his grade 12.
Apart from heartening Indian women, these pro-women judgments would confirm the role of mothers as expressed by Felicia D. Hemans, English poet (1794-1835):

There is none,

In all this cold and hollow world, no fount

Of deep, strong deathless love, save that within

A mother’s heart.

According to Thackeray, “Mother is the name for God in the lips and hearts of children”.

It is fortunate and welcome that our higher judiciary is giving legal sanction to these sentiments.

  

Top Stories

Comment on this article

  • John B. Monteiro, Bondel Mangalore

    Fri, Jul 10 2015

    Thank you Dr. Mohan Prabhu (and all other respondents) and the suggestion for my further comment.

    I am no expert on the subject. Yet, I can see the developing trends. The SC judgment noted that Hindu women are better placed as they are considered natural guardians of their illegitimate children by virtue of their maternity alone.
    There is subtle prodding for adopting Uniform Civil Code as mandated by the Directive Principles of the Constitution which “remain an unaddressed constitutional expectation”. The Canon Law relating to marriage and divorce of Christians is being examined by the Supreme Court under a petition by Mangalore’s veteran Advocate Clarence Pais. Pending its outcome and in the interest of enlightened self-interest the church tribunals handling divorce cases better improve the quality of justice delivery and speed. Otherwise, dissatisfied litigants, specially women, themselves may seek civil courts for speedy and impartial justice.
    When it comes to Muslims, the scenario is even worse as beyond Shariat, all and sundry mullas and their collectives issue whimsical patwas as when the father-in-law raped the daughter-in-law, she was declared his wife (with the son nowhere in the picture).
    All this will strengthen the case for Uniform Civil Code, with the higher judiciary nudging for it.
    Finally, my Christian brothrens need to be less judgmental as Pope Francis said, in a similar situation, “Who am I to judge?”

    DisAgree Agree [2] Reply Report Abuse

  • Dr Mohan Prabhu, mangalore/ottawa

    Sat, Jul 11 2015

    Thank you John for taking the time to respond. I was aware of the developments (through Daijiworld, of course) and am looking forward to further developments on the UCC. Meanwhile, I have noticed that in the guise of "annulment" divorces are granted by the catholic church (in Canada) - and this is from personal knowledge - even after a couple has lived for over fifty years and have had children. The real reason is "incompatibility" in many such cases.
    Mohan

    DisAgree Agree [2] Reply Report Abuse

  • Joseph F. Gonsalves, Bannur, Puttur, Mangalore

    Fri, Jul 10 2015

    The dignity, character, moral structures of the family and the society is continuously ruining day by day for a relentless pleasures of the humans.

    UPHOLDING THE SNOOPING AND ENCOURAGING BENAMI CHILDREN.

    DisAgree Agree [3] Reply Report Abuse

  • John, US

    Fri, Jul 10 2015

    Enthroning woman or punishing children? The US has millions of children growing without fathers after so called pro-woman laws were passed.

    DisAgree [2] Agree [3] Reply Report Abuse

  • Dr Mohan Prabhu, mangalore/ottawa

    Fri, Jul 10 2015

    A very interesting article on a decision hat opens up a can of worms. The Court may have left the door open for single women families (marumakkatayam?) but may have ignored the future rights of the child, especially whether it is entitled to inheritance from the putative father known or unknown, and whether the mother may be forced to disclose her paramour's identity for good and valid reasons, including health. In such situations, the mother cannot ignore her child's rights as well as the right to know who the father is - a task that may sometimes be difficult if the mother herself cannot identify. May be Mr. Monteiro can add a few observations of his own on these points.
    Dr. Mohan Prabhu

    DisAgree Agree [2] Reply Report Abuse

  • sam, world

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    The destruction of the family has been Satan's plan for a long time. The union of man and wife that God hallowed, Satan seeks to destroy. Unwed or single mothers, irresponsible fathers, adulterous spouses, divorce, etc. have plagued society due to man and womans weakness to sin. Both a father and mother are necessary for the growth and development of the child. The model Christians need to look up and follow is the Holy Family of Child Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and Saint Joseph and not fall for the ways of the world. Pray that the father wakes up from his slumber and becomes a real man following the footsteps of St. Joseph.

    DisAgree Agree [8] Reply Report Abuse

  • Dev, Mangalore

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    Guardianship should be given to either of the parents for legal purposes only, but maintenance should be her right if the man abandons both.
    We should appreciate veteran Tennis Player Boris Becker who had a fling with Russian woman in London hotel in a small room meant to hang the coats. They both went their own way & she conceived & gave birth to a son, Becker came to know that & asked for paternity test which proved he was biological father & he paid big amount to take care of the kid & mother as he was already married & had kids of his own.

    DisAgree Agree [7] Reply Report Abuse

  • Joe Gonsalves, Mangalore

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    It appears that in cases like a father making use of a women to suit his purpose the Court has indeed taken the trouble to make thorough studies after taking into account all relevant facts.

    A man who has used a woman to suit his purpose however should provide means to raise the child even thought he may not be allowed the custody of the child.

    I the particular instance cited above there appears to a complete abandonment of responsibilities by the father.

    DisAgree [3] Agree [6] Reply Report Abuse

  • Eric Coelho, Mangalore

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    Good news for women. I fully support SC decision to enthrone women. Time it is done. I am very happy about it as I have 2 daughters and feel proud as a dad.

    DisAgree [2] Agree [10] Reply Report Abuse

  • vivek, Hirebile/ Abu Dhabi

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    enthroning women..?..encouraging men/women.???....Complicated issue...Law must differ case to case.....

    DisAgree Agree [8] Reply Report Abuse

  • mohan, mangalore

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    Good news for men. Now they can father with any women and skip from responsibility.
    Also is problem for the child when he grow up and don't know who he father.

    DisAgree [5] Agree [13] Reply Report Abuse

  • jd, mangalore

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    The sign of a mature society this is. This is also natural justice. The mother is primarily the natural guardian because the child is nurtured and brought into the world by her.

    In a proper relationship, this question doesn't arise at all, because the man and woman, want the child, are proud of it's birth and desire to take care of it together.

    In a strained relationship, the mother has to be given priority. But, I definitely do not encourage women, to mi-use this, to take maintenance from the husband, and become untrue to the ethos of the land and the court. Respect to women comes from, how they conduct themselves, not by force and court orders.

    DisAgree [7] Agree [7] Reply Report Abuse

  • Jossey Saldanha, Mumbai

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    This is Genuine Women Empowerment ...

    DisAgree [6] Agree [14] Reply Report Abuse

  • HENRY MISQUITH, Bahrain

    Thu, Jul 09 2015

    Wow nice and impressive judgement by SC, for upholding the dignity of woman.

    DisAgree [5] Agree [12] Reply Report Abuse


Leave a Comment

Title: Guardianship right of unwed mothers: Is SC enthroning women?



You have 2000 characters left.

Disclaimer:

Please write your correct name and email address. Kindly do not post any personal, abusive, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent, discriminatory or unlawful or similar comments. Daijiworld.com will not be responsible for any defamatory message posted under this article.

Please note that sending false messages to insult, defame, intimidate, mislead or deceive people or to intentionally cause public disorder is punishable under law. It is obligatory on Daijiworld to provide the IP address and other details of senders of such comments, to the authority concerned upon request.

Hence, sending offensive comments using daijiworld will be purely at your own risk, and in no way will Daijiworld.com be held responsible.


Security Validation

Enter the characters in the image