Chambers of Ishaan Garg
Ch. No. 217, Western Wing, District & Sessions Court, Tis Hazari, New Delhi, Delhi 110054
+91 8851742417, +91 8800386163
Paragraph 85 of the impugned judgment would reveal that the High Court had enquired about the desire and comfort of the child with respect to his schooling and stay during the interaction. The court found that the child expressed no difficulty in his schooling or his stay in Bengaluru and ultimately satisfied that the child is comfortable and secure with staying with his mother.
16. The child in question is a boy, now around 11 years and a naturalised US citizen with an American passport and his parents viz., the Appellant and Respondent No. 3 are holders of Permanent US Resident Cards. These aspects were not given due attention. So also, the fact that child in question was born in USA on 03.02.2011 and till the year 2020 he was living and studying there, was also not given due weight while considering question of welfare of the child. Merely because he was brought to India by the mother on 03.03.2020 and got him admitted in a school and that he is now feeling comfortable with schooling and stay in Bengaluru could not have been taken as factors for considering the welfare of the boy aged 11 years born and lived nearly for a decade in USA. The very fact that he is a naturalised citizen of US with American passport and on that account he might, in all probability, have good avenues and prospects in the country where he is a citizen. This crucial aspect has not been appreciated at all. In our view, taking into account the entire facts and circumstances and the environment in which the child had born and was brought up for about a decade coupled with the fact that he is a naturalised American citizen, his return to America would be in his best interest. In this case it is also to be noted that on two occasions American courts ordered to return the child to USA. True that the first order to that effect was vacated at the instance of Respondent No. 3. However, taking into account all aspects, we are of the view that it is not a fit case where courts in India should refuse to acknowledge the orders of the US Courts directing return of the minor child to the Appellant keeping in view the best interests of the child. In our view, a consideration on the point of view of the welfare of the child would only support the order for the return of the child to his native country viz., USA. For, the child is a naturalised American citizen with American passport. He has been brought up in the social and culture value milieu of USA and, therefore, accustomed to the lifestyle, language, custom, Rules and regulations of his native country viz., USA. Further, he will have better avenues and prospects if he returns to USA, being a naturalised American citizen.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 4987 of 2022
Decided On: 29.07.2022
Rohith Thammana Gowda Vs. State of Karnataka and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
A.M. Khanwilkar and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ.
Author: C.T. Ravikumar, J.
Citation: MANU/SC/0938/2022.
1. Leave granted.
