CASELAW

Goutham v. Goutham (2020) : In this case, the Delhi High Court ruled that an Indian court has jurisdiction to decide the custody of a child born to an Indian-American couple who were married in the United States, even if the child is a citizen of the United States. The court held that the child had a close connection to India because she had been living with her mother in India for several years.

• ILLUSTRATION
  A is a US citizen who marries B, an Indian citizen. They have a child together and live in the United States for a few years. However, the marriage eventually ends in divorce, and A wants to return to the United States with the child. B, however, wants the child to stay in India.  In this scenario, A and B are facing the cross-border child custody dispute of deciding where their child should live after their divorce. Both A and B have strong ties to their home countries, and it is difficult for them to agree on where to settle down.
  In this situation the child will be under the custody of mother if she is not ill minded and is capable of rising the child and after the child matures or becomes major, the child will be given option whether to live with father or mother and the child’s choice will decide whether he will stay in America or India.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A is a US citizen who marries B, an Indian citizen. They have a child together and live in the United States for a few years. However, A and B eventually get divorced, and B takes the child back to India without A's consent. A then files a petition in the United States court to have the child returned to the United States. In this scenario, A and B are facing the cross-border child custody dispute of international parental child abduction. B has taken the child back to India without A's consent, and A is seeking to have the child returned to the United States.
  In this situation it is wrong to take the child into custody without the concern of the partner or the courts judgement thus a proper case will be held in appropriate jurisdiction and only after that A or B can have custody of child and if B doesn’t return to America for the proceeding the case can be held in Indian courts or they may send B to America. It is not able that the case result may differ according to the countries laws where it differs from one and another.‍

CASELAWS

Reena Kaur v. Raj Kumar (2019) : In this case, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that a California court has jurisdiction to decide the custody of a child born to an American-Indian couple who were married in the United States, even if the child is a citizen of India. The court held that the child had a close connection to the United States because she had been living with her mother in California for her entire life.

The court also considered the best interests of the child in making its decision. The court found that the child was well-adjusted to living in the United States and had a strong bond with her mother. The court also found that the father had not made any significant efforts to maintain a relationship with the child since the separation. Based on these factors, the court awarded custody of the child to the mother.

• ILLUSTRATION
  An American man A married an Indian woman B and they lived in India. After a few years of marriage, the couple had a child and then separated. The husband and wife were unable to agree on child custody arrangements. The wife filed for divorce in India and the Indian court ordered that the child would remain with her until he reached the age of 18.
  The husband refused to return the child to India. The wife filed a petition with the Indian court to enforce its order in the United States. The United States court ordered the husband to return the child to India. The husband complied with the order and the child was reunited with his mother.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A is an American citizen who marries B, an Indian citizen. They live in the United States and have a child together. However, the marriage ends in divorce. A and B agree to joint custody of the child. However, B has difficulty traveling to the United States to visit the child due to visa issues.
  In this situation the B can approach the court for an appeal that will make it easy for B to visit the child. B can approach the concern court.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A is an American citizen who marries B, an Indian citizen. They live in India and have a child together. However, the marriage ends in divorce. A abandons the child in India and returns to the United States. B files for child custody in India, but A cannot be located.
  Until A returns or found child stays in the custody of B and the court will order the appropriate officer or department to  locate and produce A in front of the court.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A, an American citizen, marries B, an Indian citizen. They have a child, C, who is a dual citizen of the United States and India. When A and B divorce, they cannot agree on child custody. A wants to take C to live in the United States, while B wants C to stay in India. This case would likely be resolved under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, which would require the child to be returned to India, where his or her habitual residence is located.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A, an American citizen, marries B, an Indian citizen. They have a child, C, who is a dual citizen of the United States and India. When A and B divorce, they agree on joint custody of C, with C spending equal time in both the United States and India. However, after a few years, B decides to move back to India permanently, taking C with him or her. A objects to this move, and the case goes to court. The court would likely consider a number of factors, including the best interests of the child, the child's citizenship, and the child's relationship with each parent. In the end, the court may decide that it is in the child's best interests to stay with B in India, or the court may order B to return C to the United States.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A, an American citizen, marries B, an Indian citizen. They have a child, C, who is a dual citizen of the United States and India. When A and B divorce, they cannot agree on child custody. A wants to take C to live in the United States, while B wants C to stay in India. This case would likely be resolved under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), which is a federal law that governs child custody disputes in the United States. The UCCJEA would require the court to determine which state has the most significant connection to the child, and that state would have jurisdiction to decide the child custody case.
• ILLUSTRATION
  A, an American citizen, marries B, an Indian citizen. They have a child, C, who is a dual citizen of the United States and India. When A and B divorce, they agree on joint custody of C, with C spending equal time in both the United States and India. However, after a few years, B starts to abuse C. A files a lawsuit in the United States to obtain sole custody of C. The court in the United States would likely grant A sole custody of C, given B's history of abuse.