On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court rejected a petition filed by a former husband challenging a family court's decision that denied his request for guardianship and custody of his 5-year-old minor child, who is a citizen of Ukraine.

A division bench comprising Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Amit Bansal ruled that it is in the child's best interest to stay with the mother and sibling, who are also citizens of Ukraine, despite tensions in other regions of the country. This arrangement ensures a safe environment for the minor.

“Accordingly, taking a holistic view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. The present appeal is dismissed. Resultantly, the respondent no.1 shall be free to leave India with the minor child,” the bench said.

The parties got married in 2000, and their marriage was dissolved in May 2021 through a court decree in Ukraine. The man was subsequently granted visitation rights. In addition to their five-year-old minor son, a minor girl was also born in 2002.

The woman alleged that her ex-husband took their minor son out for a walk in 2022 but did not return. She claimed that she later discovered he had crossed the border into India from Romania with the minor child.

In October of last year, her habeas corpus plea was disposed of by a coordinate bench, granting the man the liberty to approach the family court for interim custody or visitation rights regarding the minor child. Subsequently, in November of the same year, the family court dismissed his guardianship petition.

The bench, in dismissing the appeal, emphasized that the child's usual place of residence is Ukraine and mentioned the minor's preference to stay with the mother.

An affidavit submitted by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs highlighted an Air Strike in Vinnytsia, Ukraine, on September 1, 2023. Additionally, it referenced advisories issued by the Indian Embassy in Kyiv in October 2022, urging "Indian Nationals" to depart from Ukraine.

“However, these advisories would not be applicable to the respondent no.1 and the minor child as both of them are citizens of Ukraine,” the court observed.

The bench also noted that the man lacked the financial means to support the minor child and even expressed his inability to deposit Rs. 1,50,000 towards litigation expenses due to financial distress.

“Even on merits, we do not think that it would be in the best interest of the minor child, who is currently five years old, to be separated from his mother (respondent no.1) and his elder sister, who are living in Vinnytsia, Ukraine.''

Counsel for Appellant: Mr K.P. Mavi, Ms Chitra Gera and Mr Dinesh Pratap Singh, Advocates

Counsel for Respondents: Mr Vivek Kohli, Senior Advocate with Ms Bhavya Bhatia, Mrs Nimita Kaul, Mrs Shivambika Sinha and Mr Gurveer Lally, Advocates for R-1; Mr Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with Mr Waize Ali Noor, Ms Shreya V. Mehra, Ms Vidhi Jain and Mr Kartika Baijal, Advocates for UOI; Ms Mehak Nakra, ASC (Civil) with Ms Disha Choudhary and Mr Abhishek Khari, Advocates for R-5

Case Title: AKHILESH KUMAR GUPTA v. MS. GUPTA SNIZHANA GRYGORIVNA & ORS.