[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Shinto Thomas vs Jyothi M on 31 January, 2026
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
SATURDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 11TH MAGHA, 1947
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2025 IN IA 2/2025 IN OP NO.873
OF 2025 OF FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/APPLICANT/PETITIONER:
SHINTO THOMAS, AGED 36 YEARS
S/O THOMAS P.F, RESIDING AT PEZHATHINGAL HOUSE,
THODANCHAL, PARAPPA VILLAGE, KANAKAPPALLI P.O.,
VELLARIKUNDU TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671533 AND
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FAMILY QUARTERS, KARMANTHODY,
KARADKA VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT,
PIN - 671542
SRI.R.ANAS MUHAMMED SHAMNAD
SRI.T.U.SUJITH KUMAR
SRI.SARUN RAJAN
SHRI.THAREEK T.S.
SHRI.HAMDAN MANSOOR K.
SHRI.SALEEK.C.A.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 JYOTHI M
AGED 31 YEARS
D/O BHASKARAN P, RESIDING AT 1/31C (9/352), MUNDOTH
HOUSE, KODAVLAM, PULLUR VILLAGE AND POST, HOSDURG
TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT -, PIN - 671531
2 CHAIRMAN
CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE, GOVERNMENT CHILDREN'S HOME,
PARAVANADUKKAM P.O., KASARAGOD -, PIN - 671317
3 MANAGER
SNEHANIKETAN FOUNDING HOME, PATTUVAM P.O.,
2026:KER:8237
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
2
THALIPARAMBA, KANNUR, PIN - 670143
4 CHAIRMAN
CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE, NETHAJI ROAD, NEAR
ERANHOLI BRIDGE, ERANHOLI, THALASSERY, KANNUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 670104
SRI SYAMANTHAK B S -GP
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
31.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:8237
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
3
JUDGMENT
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 order of the learned
Family Court, Kasaragod, through which, his child has been
given in interim custody, pending OP No.873/2025, to the first
respondent herein - who is her biological mother.
2. The facts we see in this case are rather strange but
distressing.
3. The petitioner and the first respondent were
married; but have matrimonial disputes between them and thus
arose contest qua custody of the child.
4. We do not propose to enter into the details of the
contentions and facts any further because, we are fully aware
that the matter is pending before the learned Family Court;
particularly since any observation of ours would have the effect
of interfering with the processes there.
5. Suffice to say, the child was with the mother and it
is alleged that she was not taking care of her. It also transpires
that the father approached the Child Welfare Committee
(CWC); and consequently, the child was taken into their
protective custody.
2026:KER:8237
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
6. It is further admitted that the child was thereupon,
on his application, given in custody to the father; but that he
put her in the charge of the third respondent - "Snehaniketan
Founding Home".
7. At this time, the mother moved the CWC for
permission to take the child with her, asserting that she has a
permanent residence, which belongs to her mother.
8. The learned Family Court took the statements of all
the parties, including the mother of the first respondent; and
issued the impugned order, allowing the child to be in her
permanent custody, but ensuring that the father had enough
access to her, giving him interim custody on every Saturday
and Sunday.
9. The petitioner challenges this order on the ground
that the child ought to have been given to him in permanent
custody.
10. We are aware that this Court had, on 30.12.2025,
directed the petitioner to take out notice to the respondents.
However, the summons issued to the first respondent has been
returned with the endorsement "addressee left, present
address not known" (sic). We are, however, of the view that we
will be justified in considering this matter even in her absence
2026:KER:8237
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
because, our directions will not cause any prejudice.
11. When we examine Ext.P4, it is evident - as is fully
admitted - that even though the petitioner was given the
custody of the child from the CWC, he put her in the care of the
third respondent - "Snehaniketan". We do not, therefore,
understand how the petitioner now seeks that he should be
given permanent custody, particularly when the learned Family
Court has done nothing to the prejudice of the child, she
having now been given in interim custody, pending the Original
Petition before it, to her own biological mother.
12. We further notice from Ext.P4 that the learned
Family Court has been gravely circumspect in issuing its
direction therein, having taken the statement of the mother of
the first respondent also, who said that she has a house of her
own and that her daughter and granddaughter can stay with
her.
13. Pertinently, as said earlier, the learned Court also
took care of the interests of the father, ensuring that he obtains
access to the child every weekend from Saturday to Sunday.
14. We are without doubt that the learned Family
Court has taken into account all germane and relevant aspects,
particularly the requirements of the child and its welfare. It is
2026:KER:8237
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
paramount that the child has equal access to both parents and
this is also her fundamental right.
15. That apart, even though the learned counsel for
the petitioner argues that the child may not be safe with the
mother, we find no reason to believe so, particularly when the
grandmother has deposed before the learned Family Court that
she has a house of her own, where both her daughter and
granddaughter will be taken care of and kept safe.
16. To add to this, the first respondent is stated to be
working as a home nurse; and therefore, with resources at
least to take care of her daughter.
This Original Petition is consequently dismissed.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/- M.B. SNEHALATHA
JUDGE
stu
2026:KER:8237
OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF OP (FC) NO. 790 OF 2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE O.P. NO.873/2025 ON THE
FILE OF THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD
DATED 29-08-2025
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO.02/2025 IN O.P.
NO.873/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE
FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD DATED 29-08-2025
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SWORN DEPOSITION OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ON 29-08-2025 IN I.A. NO.02/2025
IN O.P. NO.873/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE
HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18-12-2025 IN
I.A. NO.02/2025 IN O.P. NO.873/2025 ON THE
FILE OF THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD
