The father argued that the child had made complaints against the mother during an interaction and the circumstances warranted a change in the custody arrangement. (AI-generated image)A father cannot take the law into his own hands and disregard a court-ordered custody arrangement, the Kerala High Court has held while directing that a minor boy be returned to his mother after finding that the father had retained the child in violation of a family court decree.Emphasising that a child’s welfare must remain the foremost consideration, the court observed that child cannot be treated as a “pawn” in parental disputes and that any grievance over custody arrangements must be addressed through legal remedies rather than unilateral action.A bench of Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V M was hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Hayarunisa Abdul Hakkim, who sought the return of her minor son after alleging that the child’s father had taken him away from school and continued to keep him despite a family court decree granting her permanent custody. Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V M referred to comprehensive child custody guidelines approved by the Calcutta High Court in September 2025. (AI-enhanced image)“It is unfortunate that the child is being treated like a pawn in the hands of the parents. The parents are not expected to behave irresponsibly. In our view, the child should now be returned to the mother, who shall continue to be the guardian of the child unless and until the order of the Family Court is modified,” the court said on June 1, directing that custody of the child be restored to the mother.Mother moved HC after child taken awayThe case stemmed from a custody arrangement formalised through a compromise decree passed by the family court, Attingal, on June 24, 2025, under which permanent custody of the child was granted to the mother.According to the petition, the father subsequently removed the child from school without informing the mother and continued to retain custody despite the subsisting decree.Claiming that her son was being unlawfully kept away from her, the mother approached the high court through a habeas corpus petition seeking his immediate return.Also Read | ‘Father’s obligation absolute’: Minor kids can’t be denied maintenance due to mother’s remarriage, says court‘Boy expressed desire to stay with mother’During the hearing, the judges independently interacted with the child as well as both parents.The court recorded that the child ultimately expressed a clear desire to stay with his mother.Although he initially stated that he wished to go with his father, the bench noted that the statement did not appear to have been made entirely of his own free will.The judges further observed that there could be no doubt that the father had taken custody of the child in violation of the family court decree.‘Father should have approached court’The father argued that the child had made complaints against the mother during an interaction at school and that circumstances warranted a change in the custody arrangement.Rejecting the justification, the high court said that even if such concerns existed, the father was required to seek modification of the decree before the family court.The bench observed that while circumstances may arise requiring a custody order to be revisited, no parent can bypass legal procedures and unilaterally assume custody in defiance of a court order.The court remarked that the father ought to have filed an application for modification of the compromise decree rather than taking the law into his own hands.Failed to return boyDuring the proceedings, the father’s counsel referred to execution proceedings pending before the family court and an order dated April 24, under which the child was apparently allowed to stay with him for a few days before being returned to the mother.Also Read | No physical visits, only weekly video calls: Court limits father’s access to minor daughter with autismThe high court noted that more than a month had passed since that order, but the child had not been returned.Observing that the habeas corpus petition had been filed on May 24, the bench said it was prima facie of the view that the father had breached the assurance given before the family court by failing to restore custody to the mother.Story continues below this ad‘Child’s welfare must override parental conflict’Stressing that custody disputes should never become an extension of matrimonial battles, the court reiterated that the welfare of the child must remain paramount.The bench held that the mother would continue as the child’s guardian unless and until the family court modified the existing custody arrangement.The court also recorded that the child was present before it and that custody was handed over to the mother in court itself.HC endorses child-centric custody frameworkIn an important development with wider implications for family law cases in Kerala, the high court referred to comprehensive child access and custody guidelines approved by the Calcutta High Court in September 2025.The bench said those guidelines, along with parenting plans, may be followed by family courts in Kerala until a committee constituted to examine the framework submits its recommendations and formal rules are framed.The court also directed the registrar general to circulate the guidelines to district judges, family courts, and magistrates dealing with custody disputes, matrimonial matters, and cases under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.Also Read | Life convict uses bathroom break to escape: What court said while rejecting his pleaSocial investigation report orderedTo assist in future proceedings, the court directed a child welfare officer to submit a social investigation report regarding the child before the family court in the pending execution proceedings.At the same time, the bench clarified that its observations in the habeas corpus case should not influence the family court while deciding the execution matter.The court further directed both parents to strictly comply with the terms of the compromise decree as it presently stands.Mediation proceedings pendingThe high court was informed that mediation proceedings relating to matrimonial disputes between the parties are ongoing.Story continues below this adExpressing hope that the parents would act responsibly, the bench said it trusted that they would take informed decisions, keeping the welfare and future of their child at the centre of their choices. The petition was accordingly disposed of.Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system. Expertise Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including: Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability. Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters. Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights. Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More