In a detailed and well-reasoned judgment delivered on 3rd April 2026, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has upheld the Family Court’s order granting custody of a minor girl (born 21.09.2018) to her biological father, while directing that the maternal grandfather be allowed to meet both granddaughters four times a month.
The Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arindam Sinha and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar (per Justice Arindam Sinha) dismissed the First Appeal filed by the maternal grandfather, Sudesh Garg, after carefully examining the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration.
Background of the Case
The minor girl’s mother passed away on 27.09.2018, just days after her birth. The father, Kushagra Garg, remarried on 07.07.2019. Shortly thereafter, the maternal grandfather filed a suit for injunction regarding the Streedhan of his deceased daughter. In response, the father filed a custody petition in September 2019.
The Family Court, Meerut, by its common judgment dated 03.12.2024, allowed the father’s custody petition and dismissed the grandfather’s custody application. Aggrieved by the same, the maternal grandfather preferred the present First Appeal before the Allahabad High Court. The appeal was specially assigned pursuant to directions of the Supreme Court.
Arguments Before the High Court
On behalf of the Appellant (Maternal Grandfather): Mr. Vishesh Rajvanshi, learned counsel (along with Mr. Sumit Daga), placed strong reliance on three Supreme Court judgments:
- Mohan Kumar Rayana vs. Komal Mohan Rayana (2010) 5 SCC 657
- Shyamrao Maroti Korwate vs. Deepak Kisanrao Tekam (2010) 10 SCC 314
- Anjali Kapoor vs. Rajiv Baijal (2009) 7 SCC 322
He argued that the father’s quick remarriage, the filing of the Streedhan suit, and the child having lived with the maternal grandparents since birth demonstrated that custody should remain with the grandfather. He also raised concerns about the treatment of the elder daughter by the stepmother.
On behalf of the Respondent (Father): Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh defended the Family Court’s judgment, highlighting the positive interaction between the two sisters and the child’s lack of any negative impression about her father.
High Court’s Key Observations
The Bench personally interacted with the minor girl (aged about 8 years) in Court. The child expressed that she likes her elder sister and had met her father once, without making any negative comment about him.
The Court made the following crucial findings:
- The child is intelligent, has a positive attitude, and is doing well academically.
- There was no material to show any strain in the relationship between the father and his first wife.
- The father’s remarriage cannot, by itself, be a ground to deny him custody.
- The Family Court had correctly recorded that the minor was under the natural influence of her grandfather due to her young age, but this alone does not justify denying custody to the natural father.
- The second wife (stepmother) was found to be caring towards the elder daughter.
- The father is financially capable of looking after the child.
The Bench carefully distinguished the Supreme Court precedents cited by the appellant, noting that the facts of the present case were materially different — particularly the absence of any long-term denial of access or demonstrable lack of affection by the father.
Final Order
While upholding the custody in favour of the father, the High Court modified the Family Court’s judgment to the limited extent of granting visitation rights to the maternal grandfather:
“We direct that appellant will be entitled to visit his grand-daughters, beginning 4 times a month, upon information to respondent of intended date and time of visit. We hope parties will soon thereafter themselves overcome any restriction in our above direction.”
The appeal was accordingly disposed of.
Key Takeaway
This judgment reaffirms that under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the welfare of the child is the sole paramount consideration. While the natural father’s right is not absolute, quick remarriage or strained relations with in-laws do not automatically disqualify a father from custody, especially when the child shows no hostility and the father is capable of providing a stable environment.
Case Details
Case Title:
Sudesh Garg vs. Kushagra Garg
Case No.: First Appeal No. 1209 of 2024
Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Bench: Hon’ble Arindam Sinha, J. & Hon’ble Prashant Kumar, J.
Date of Judgment: 03 April 2026
Counsel for Appellant(s): Sumit Daga Vishesh Rajvanshi
Counsel for Respondent(s): Satyendra Narayan Singh
Lawcutor 