'Landmark Decision': Kerala High Court appoints separate lawyer for child in custody battle

Kerala High Court, for the first time, took an unprecedented step by assigning a dedicated lawyer to represent a minor in a child custody lawsuit. The decision was prompted by the Court’s recognition that amid a custody tug-of-war between the parents, there existed no advocate solely focused on safeguarding the child’s welfare. A panel of two judges, namely Justices A Muhamed Mustaque and Sophy Thomas, were presiding over the proceedings of a custody dispute brought forward by the father (the petitioner) who sought custody of his youngest offspring. The petitioner, who was a practicing barrister, had fathered three children with his estranged spouse. Initially, the family court had granted custody of the first two children to the father, a decision reached upon uncovering evidence of their maternal grandfather having subjected them to inappropriate conduct. The petitioner’s legal representative additionally conveyed that there existed medical documentation indicating that the youngest child had undergone a similar ordeal at the hands of the mother. Moreover, a case had been registered against the mother under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). In a preceding hearing related to another child custody case, Parvathy Menon, an advocate and Project Coordinator of the Victim Rights Centre, highlighted the necessity of assigning independent legal counsel to minors. This practice, she argued, would be pivotal in shielding their fundamental interests, which otherwise risked being drowned amidst the fiery contentions between the parents. This proposition surfaced in light of the realization that although custody laws inherently prioritize the “best interests” of the child, the child’s perspective concerning their own welfare is not customarily presented before the court. In a laudable move, the High Court has now implemented this very notion in the ongoing custody dispute. Advocates Jamsheed Hafiz, KK Nesna, and TS Sreekutty stood as the representatives for the child’s father. On the other side, advocate Fathima Beevi represented the child’s mother.