While making an important observation in a matter relating to the guardianship of a child after the death of the wife, the Delhi High Court observed that maternal grandparents may have immense love and affection for the child, but they are no substitute for the love and affection of the parents.

While ruling in favor of the father, the court also held that ''The second marriage of the father after the loss of his first wife cannot be disqualified to continue as the natural guardian of his child.

A divsion bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Nina Bansal Krishna observed that even disparity in financial status may not be a relevant factor for denying custody of a child to the natural parent, but the circumstances and preference of the child are something else. 

It cannot be in the interest and welfare of the child to take him out of the family where he is living happily from an early age.

The bench said that in such a situation it is appropriate to give limited visitation rights to the father. During the course of hearings, the Court directed that the father will be able to meet the child every first and third Saturday between noon to 5 pm in the children's room of the Family Court at Karkardooma Court.

If the child is unable to come for the appointment on a Saturday, the appointment will be held on the next working Saturday. The court said that this arrangement will continue for the next three months. After this the time will be from 3 pm to 7 pm.

The court made the above observation and order while hearing the appeal petition of maternal grandparents of a boy. The boy's maternal grandparents had challenged the family court's decision to appoint them as his guardians and dismiss their plea seeking his permanent custody.

The defendant father and the girl were married in the year 2007 and had a son in the year 2008. The maternal grandparents alleged that in the year 2010, within seven years of marriage, the defendant husband had committed murder due to dowry demand and harassment.

However, the husband and his family members were acquitted in the criminal case filed by the maternal grandparents in 2012. He claimed that the custody of the child was handed over to him after the father absconded.