In a significant observation, the Supreme Court of India has stated that a child custody dispute between working parents cannot be decided merely on the basis that one parent works from home. The apex court emphasized that both partners in a marriage work to meet individual and family aspirations, including securing quality education for their children.
Bench Rejects Work-from-Home as Primary Custody Criterion
A bench comprising Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan remarked that it is incorrect to assume a child's interests are better served by a parent working from home compared to one who goes to a physical office daily. The court was hearing an appeal in a custody battle over a five-year-old boy in the National Capital Region (NCR).
The bench explicitly stated, "We do not subscribe to the view that if one parent is working from home and the other is not then it has to be inferred that child’s interest would be better served if he is placed in the custody of the one who does not go to office for work."
The court acknowledged that both parents are working professionals and cannot always be physically present with their children. However, this reality should not be grounds for awarding custody to the parent with a temporary work-from-home arrangement.
Details of the NCR Custody Case
The case involved a couple with two children – a boy and a girl. The boy was living with the father, while the girl was with the mother. The Supreme Court interacted with the five-year-old boy during the proceedings.
The court noted key factors from this interaction:
- The child expressed a desire for the company of his sister but was not willing to leave his father's care.
- The father's household included elder family members, such as the grandfather, who provided company to the child.
- The boy, now above five years old, continues to study in the same school and has no issues with his father.
Considering these circumstances, the bench saw no reason to interfere with the earlier High Court order that had granted custody to the father. The Supreme Court also noted that the mother retains visitation rights as directed previously.
Broader Implications for Custody Disputes
The Supreme Court's clarification came specifically because the High Court, while granting custody to the father, had mentioned his work-from-home status as a point in his favor. The apex court's ruling seeks to correct this interpretation, establishing that the mode of work – remote or office-based – should not be a decisive factor.
The judgment underscores a modern reality: that married couples often both work to build a secure home and fulfill aspirations, particularly for their children's education. The court's decision prioritizes the child's expressed comfort, stability of environment, and continuity in schooling over a simplistic comparison of parents' work schedules.
This ruling is expected to guide future family court cases where the work arrangements of parents are presented as a primary argument for custody.
