Mother Engaging Maid No Ground To Deny Child Custody, Says Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court recently observed that the mere act of a mother engaging a maid to assist in caring for a young child cannot be used to deny her custody rights.
Dismissing a father's objection in a child custody battle, the court underscored that such arrangements are common in households with infants and do not, by themselves, suggest neglect or incapacity on the part of the mother.
The case stemmed from a dispute between a married couple over the custody of their infant son, born in June 2023. After leaving the matrimonial home, the mother filed a petition under the Guardians and Wards Act before the family court seeking permanent custody of the child. She also sought interim custody, which was granted on January 30, 2024.
The father challenged this interim order before the Bombay High Court’s Aurangabad bench, arguing that the mother was not personally attending to the child and had instead delegated care to a maid. He submitted that this, combined with her alleged postnatal mental health issues, warranted the reversal of the custody decision.
However, the bench of Justice R.M. Joshi rejected the argument, noting that engaging domestic help is a normal and practical decision for many mothers managing infant care, especially in urban households. The court observed:
“Even if it is accepted that a maid servant is engaged by respondent, it is not uncommon for a maid servant to be engaged where there is small child in the house. In such circumstances, the said fact even if it is accepted to be true will not become a ground to cause interference in the impugned order.”
Furthermore, the bench emphasized that the father had failed to bring any substantive material to show that the child’s custody with the mother was harmful or against the child's welfare.
The bench observed that anxiety and depression post-childbirth are not uncommon and do not by themselves prove the mother is incapable of nurturing her child. The court cited the family court’s finding that the respondent appeared well-functioning, held a valid driving license, moved around independently in Pune, and exhibited no signs of harmful behavior. It noted that the medical certificate furnished by the respondent affirmed her ability to care for the baby.
Strengthening the mother’s case, the court noted that the child had been in her custody for around eight months, and no concerns about the child’s health, safety, or development had been raised during that period. In fact, medical records indicated that the child was in normal physical and mental health.
The father had also argued that the family court, by granting custody at the interim stage, had effectively given final relief. The high court, however, clarified that the custody order was provisional and made pending a final decision on the mother’s primary petition for permanent custody. It found no procedural irregularity in the family court's approach.
In conclusion, the high court found no merit in the father’s plea and upheld the family court’s order granting interim custody to the mother.
Case Title: Xxx vs Yyy