SC Denies Atul Subhash’s Mother Custody Of His Minor Son

The Supreme Court has declined to grant custody of a four-year-old boy, the son of Bengaluru techie Atul Subhash, who allegedly died by suicide in December 2024.

The court suggested that issues related to the child’s custody should be raised before the trial court handling the criminal case.

A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and N Kotiswar Singh dismissed the plea filed by Anju Devi, Subhash’s mother, seeking custody of her grandson. The court underscored that there is a distinct legal procedure for such matters and that Devi had no established relationship with the child. “We are sorry, but the child does not know the petitioner. You can visit the child, but for custody, you must follow the proper legal process,” the bench remarked.

Subhash, a 34-year-old techie, was found dead at his residence in Bengaluru’s Munnekolalu on December 9, 2024. In his final messages—both written and recorded—he accused his estranged wife, Nikita Singhania, and her family of mental harassment. Following an investigation, Singhania and her parents were arrested on charges of abetment of suicide but were later released on conditional bail.

During the court proceedings, Singhania’s lawyer informed the bench that the boy is currently studying at a boarding school in Faridabad, Haryana. “The mother went to Faridabad yesterday and took the child from the school. She will bring him back to Bengaluru as she needs to stay there to meet the bail conditions,” the counsel explained.

Countering this, Devi’s lawyer argued that it was inappropriate for a child under the age of six to be sent to boarding school. He pointed out that Devi had last seen her grandson when he was 2.5 years old and expressed concern over the child’s wellbeing. He also reiterated that custody should be granted to the grandmother, who was willing to care for the child.

However, the bench maintained that a young child should remain with at least one parent whenever possible. “The child cannot be expected to be at ease with someone he hardly knows. Ideally, the child should be with both parents, but if that’s not possible, then at least one parent should have custody,” the court observed.

Addressing media coverage of the case, the bench stressed that public narratives cannot influence the judicial process. “This is not a media trial; the court will decide based on legal evidence and facts,” the justices noted.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on January 20.

Read More: AIADMK MLAs Don Black Shirts in Tamil Nadu Assembly Amid Sexual Assault Row