I find this story about a murderous husband losing custody of his son quite bizarre in light of the other custody battle that has been in the media spotlight, that of the surrogate Japanese baby. The article opens:
A father is the natural guardian of his child, so goes the law. But, when a father is accused of murdering his wife over dowry, can he still have the same legal right to claim custody of the child?
If that’s so, I fail to understand the legal logic behind the problem of the Japanese father having custody over his newborn daughter… Apparently the delay is because of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, in which a single father cannot adopt a girl child.
The baby girl at a hospital in Jaipur. (TOI Photo)
Related posts:
