Bombay High Court Restores Child Custody to Mother Over Nepal Fleeing Fears

The Bombay High Court has ordered the immediate restoration of custody of a nine-year-old boy to his mother, ruling that there was a real risk of the father fleeing with the child to Nepal. Delivering the decision on July 9, 2026, a division bench of Justices Sarang V. Kotwal and Ashish S. Chavan upheld an earlier decree and noted that the boy is enrolled in a school in Chembur.

Under a consent divorce decree finalized in November 2025, both parents had agreed that the child would stay in the mother’s custody, while the father held visitation rights. According to the mother's petition, the father visited her residence on April 26, 2026, while she was at work and took the child away without her consent.

During the July 9 hearing, the mother presented a phone conversation transcript in which the father allegedly claimed that even if the entire police force of India searched for him, they would not find him. She informed the court that he threatened she would never see or contact her son again unless she withdrew the case against him.

The mother further expressed concern that the father intended to take the child to Nepal. A police officer informed the court that law enforcement had traced the father to a village in Uttar Pradesh, located just two kilometres from the Nepal border. The officer added that the father returned only after his brother contacted him.

The father argued before the court that it was not possible to send the boy back because the child did not wish to live with his mother.

Rejecting the father's claim, the bench held that remaining with the mother was in the child's best interests, highlighting his education at his school in Chembur. The court observed that allowing the father to keep the child created a genuine possibility of him escaping to Nepal, which would prevent the mother from regaining custody despite the legal decree in her favour.

The High Court directed that the boy be handed over to his mother immediately and ordered police protection to guarantee his safe return home. Restraining the father from harassing the mother, the bench noted that he remains free to initiate proper legal proceedings if he wishes to seek formal custody.

To allow contact, the court granted the father supervised visitation rights for two hours every morning, provided the visits take place in the presence of a male member of the mother’s family.