Supreme Court Rules on Child Custody Dispute Between NRI Parents

The case of Yashita Sahu vs. State of Rajasthan & Others revolved around a contentious child custody dispute between an NRI couple. The Supreme Court had to determine whether the mother’s removal of the minor child from the United States (USA) to India, allegedly in violation of a foreign court order, justified her return along with the child to the USA.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Yashita Sahu, and her husband, Varun Varma, were married in India on May 30, 2016. Shortly after, they moved to the USA, where their daughter, Kiyara Verma, was born on May 3, 2017. The child was a USA citizen. Due to marital disputes, the wife filed for an Emergency Protection Order in the Norfolk Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court in the USA on August 25, 2018, which was granted against the husband.

Subsequently, on August 29, 2018, she sought sole custody of the minor child in the same court and also requested monetary support. On September 26, 2018, the Norfolk Court issued an order outlining joint custody arrangements, which included financial support for the wife and child, and an agreement for shared physical custody between both parents.

However, on September 30, 2018, the wife left the USA with the child and came to India without informing the husband. Upon learning this, the husband filed a motion for emergency relief in the Norfolk Court, which then granted sole custody of the child to him and directed the wife to return to the USA with the child.

Following this, the husband filed a habeas corpus petition in the Rajasthan High Court, seeking custody of the minor child. On July 1, 2019, the High Court directed the wife to return to the USA along with the child within six weeks to allow the USA jurisdictional court to decide further custody proceedings. The wife then challenged this order in the Supreme Court of India.

Arguments by the Petitioner

The appellant, Yashita Sahu, contended the following:

• The child was in the legal custody of the mother, who is the natural guardian.
• The Rajasthan High Court had erred in directing her to return to the USA.
• The minor child, being less than three years old and a girl, required the care and protection of her mother.
• She had difficulty understanding the legal proceedings in the USA due to a language barrier and lack of adequate legal assistance.
• The USA court’s order was not binding in India, and the child’s welfare should take precedence over any foreign court ruling.
• The husband’s work permit in the USA was valid only until 2020, creating uncertainty regarding the child’s future.

Arguments by the Respondent

The respondents, including the husband and the State of Rajasthan, presented the following arguments:

• The wife had voluntarily sought legal recourse in the Norfolk Court and had entered into an agreement regarding joint custody.
• By taking the child to India, she had violated the USA court’s order, which had awarded sole custody to the husband.
• Parental rights must be upheld, and the wife could not unilaterally remove the child from the jurisdiction of the USA court.
• Modern parenting norms recognize that fathers can also be appropriate natural guardians for minor children.
• The husband had no intention of divorcing the wife and was willing to provide financial support for both her and the child if they returned to the USA.

Supreme Court Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled that the custody dispute should be decided based on the best interest of the child. It observed:

“A child, especially one of tender years, requires the love, affection, company, and protection of both parents. It is not just the right of the parents but also the right of the child to have access to both.”

The Court held:

• The wife had violated the Norfolk Court’s order by leaving the USA with the child.
• The Rajasthan High Court had erred in directing the wife to return to the USA, as no court can force an adult to live in a particular place.
• However, the doctrine of comity of courts should be respected, and foreign judgments must be given due consideration.
• The child’s welfare was of paramount importance, and custody should not be determined solely based on legal rights but on what best serves the child.

Final Outcome

The Supreme Court issued two sets of directions:

Option 1: If the Wife is Willing to Return to the USA

• The husband must provide full financial support for travel, stay, and all necessary expenses.
• The wife will have the right to seek modification of the Norfolk Court’s custody order upon returning.
• The husband must withdraw any coercive legal proceedings initiated against the wife in the USA.

Option 2: If the Wife Refuses to Return

• The wife must hand over the child to the husband or his mother in Rajasthan.
• The husband must ensure regular video calls between the mother and child.
• The child must visit India twice a year for extended periods to maintain a bond with the mother.
• If the husband’s visa is not renewed, the wife may seek fresh legal remedies in India.

This judgment reaffirmed that child custody decisions should prioritize the child’s welfare above legal technicalities and parental disputes.

Petitioner Name: Yashita Sahu.
Respondent Name: State of Rajasthan & Others.
Judgment By: Justice Deepak Gupta, Justice Aniruddha Bose.
Place Of Incident: USA and Rajasthan, India.
Judgment Date: 20-01-2020.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Yashita Sahu vs State of Rajasthan & Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 20-01-2020.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Child Custody
See all petitions in Fundamental Rights
See all petitions in Constitution Interpretation
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
See all petitions in Judgment by Deepak Gupta
See all petitions in Judgment by Aniruddha Bose
See all petitions in partially allowed
See all petitions in Modified
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments January 2020
See all petitions in 2020 judgments

See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category