Yesterday, the Kerala High Court held that a mother's right to breastfeed and a baby's right to be breastfed are integral aspects of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court made this observation while setting aside a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) order that had granted custody of a breastfeeding infant to the father.

The Child Welfare Committee (CWC) had granted custody of the infant to the father, believing that the baby would not be safe with the mother, who had reportedly eloped with her father-in-law.

Justice V.G. Arun, in setting aside the CWC's decision and directing that custody be returned to the mother, noted that the committee's order displayed only the "moral bias" of its members.

The court further observed that the CWC deemed the mother unfit "based on the personal biases of its members."

"The one and only concern of the committee should be the best interest of the child. That the mother of the child has chosen to live with a person other than her husband is not the committee's concern."

"Judged by the moral standards of the members, the petitioner (mother) may not be a good person, but that does not make her a bad mother. Personal moral values always result in biased judgments. Unfortunately, the order reflects nothing other than the moral bias of the committee members," the court said.

Further, the court expressed surprise that the CWC failed to consider the fact that the infant was being breastfed "while hastily granting custody of the child to the third respondent (father)."

"The counsel for the petitioner is correct in her submission that, severance of a one year and four month old baby from its mother violates her right to breastfeed the baby and that of the baby to be breastfed, such right being a facet of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution," the court said.

The court described the outcome of the CWC order as "disheartening," noting that it led to the infant being separated from its mother for nearly a month, thus "denying the care, comfort, and love that is essential at this stage."

"The CWC having failed to consider these crucial factors, the impugned order cannot withstand the scrutiny of law." "... the impugned order is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, thereby impinging upon the fundamental rights of the petitioner as well as the child," the court said.