The Kerala High Court has ruled that separating a one-year-and-four-month-old infant from her mother violates both the mother’s right to breastfeed and the baby’s right to be breastfed. These rights are considered part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The court emphasized that the Constitution requires the state to promote nutrition, which implicitly supports breastfeeding practices.
Justice VG Arun presided over the case and criticized the Child Welfare Committee’s (CWC) order, directing that custody of the infant be given back to her mother. The court stressed that the child’s best interests and the mother’s right to care for her child should be prioritized. Justice Arun stated, “This important aspect of motherhood is protected under the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is unfortunate that this child has remained un-breastfed due to circumstances beyond her control. In a civilized society, such things should never happen.”
The case began when the mother, who married the father in 2019, left her husband three months after their child was born in 2023. She cited harassment as the reason for leaving. Afterward, her husband filed a police complaint, which led to a registered FIR. The mother moved in with her own mother and later eloped with another man, prompting further complaints from her husband.
During the investigation, the police presented the mother before a Magistrate. After recording her statement, the Magistrate allowed her to live independently, recognizing that she was 23 years old and had made her choice voluntarily. However, the Magistrate directed the police to present the child to the CWC, suspecting that the child might need care and protection.
The CWC granted custody of the child to the father, prompting the mother to appeal to the High Court. The court criticized the CWC’s decision, stating that it was biased and failed to prioritize the child’s best interests. The ruling noted, “The mother’s choice to live with another person is not the Committee’s concern. While the petitioner may not meet the moral standards of the Committee members, that does not make her a bad mother. Personal moral values often lead to biased judgments, and unfortunately, this order reflects that bias.”
Referencing a previous High Court decision (Aneesa FV vs Shafeekmon KI, 2023), the court reiterated that moral judgments can compromise the objectivity required in such cases. It concluded that the CWC’s order violated both the principles of natural justice and the fundamental rights of the mother and child.
The court subsequently nullified the CWC’s order, pointing out, “Surprisingly, the fact that the child was being breastfed was not considered by the Committee when they hastily granted custody to the father.”
In a final directive, the court ordered the father to return custody of the child to the mother immediately.
Related Topics:
