The Kerala High Court has intervened in a distressing case involving three young siblings who sought the help of the Palakkad district collector to prevent their parents' separation. Justice P V Kunhikrishnan, who holds administrative charge of the Palakkad district judiciary, on Tuesday directed the principal district and sessions judge, K E Salih, to submit a detailed report on the incident based on media reports.
Background of the Case
According to reports, three siblings — two girls aged 12 and 10, and an eight-year-old boy — from Aanakkara in Thrithala, along with their 12-year-old cousin and grandfather, approached the district collector on Monday. They appealed for help to keep their parents together, as their mother wanted to separate from their father and sought custody of the children. The siblings, however, expressed their desire to remain together as a family.
Children's Allegations
The children claimed that during a trip to visit their mother abroad during the Vishu holidays, she neglected them and barely interacted with them. After returning home, the situation worsened, with their father allegedly turning to alcoholism, leaving the children emotionally distressed and isolated from friends and relatives. The mother recently returned to Kerala and reportedly asked the children to live with her separately, excluding their father. This prompted the children to approach the district collector, stating they would go with their mother only if their father was also allowed to stay with them.
Previous Interventions
Before approaching the collector, the children had reportedly contacted the child welfare committee regarding ongoing family disputes and police cases, which they said had emotionally exhausted them. The collector has arranged counselling for them with the support of the child protection unit under the state women and child development department.
High Court's Observations
The High Court's involvement highlights the emotional burden on children in custody disputes. Recently, a division bench headed by Justice Devan Ramachandran orally observed that children cannot be used as "pawns" in disputes arising from fractured parental relationships. "How can you use your son or daughter as a weapon, as a pawn in the game that you are playing? If you are doing property dealings with your child, you are a bad parent," the bench remarked.
This case underscores the need for sensitivity in handling family disputes where children are involved, ensuring their welfare remains paramount.
