The Madras High Court (HC) recently refused to grant custody of two minor children to their mother, noting that her admitted conduct, including sharing ‘nude’ and ‘semi-nude’ photographs with another man and talking to him over late-night phone and video calls could be detrimental to the children’s welfare. 

A bench of the HC, comprising Justice PT Asha and N Mala, upheld the Udhagamandalam Family Court’s decision to reject the woman’s custody plea, and passed the order on September 1. The kids, aged seven and nine, were called by the HC as being of an impressionable age. 

The court remarked that given the woman’s admitted conduct, handing over the kids’ custody to her could cast a dark shadow over the children’s understanding of what was morally and ethically correct. 

Family dispute over custody

As per court records, the couple got hitched on March 23, 2015, and had two children. The husband informed the court that in February 2023, he discovered that his wife had shared intimate pictures of her with other men on a messaging application. He also alleged that she had been making late-night video calls to several males. 

Six days later, he took her to her parents’ home, while the kids continued to stay with him. Subsequently, the woman filed a guardian petition seeking custody of the children. The Udhagamandalam Family Court dismissed her plea on  August 29, 2025, following which she knocked on the doors of the Madras High Court (HC) challenging the decision. 

The HC ruled that the family court had examined the woman as a witness and that she had confessed to having conversations with several men, as well as to the presence of the pictures on her phone. 

The husband had also produced a cell phone and a pen drive containing the pictures before the family court. 

“Welfare is paramount consideration”: Madras HC

The HC emphasised that the central consideration in child custody matters is the welfare of the minor children. It noted that such welfare is not just confined to physical well-being, but extends beyond it, encompassing moral and religious welfare under the applicable guardianship laws. 

The HC bench observed that the allegations and evidence pointed to what it called ‘a person with low-moral fibre,’ whose company could be detrimental to the welfare of children at an impressionable age. 

It then referred to the traditional saying, “Matha, Pitha, Guru, Deivam,” noting the culturally revered position accorded to mothers. Concluding the hearing, the HC asserted, “Therefore, in light of the above discussion, we find that the Learned Family Judge rightly rejected the petition by considering the overall well-being and welfare of the minor children,” finding no reason to interfere with the family court’s decision.

Thereafter, the Madras HC accordingly dismissed the woman’s appeal, leaving the children in their father’s custody.