The Supreme Court took quick and serious action after a Russian woman disappeared with her child, violating court orders. The Indian father was left helpless. The Court gave urgent orders to locate the child and stop the mother from leaving the country.
Brief Facts of the Case
- The couple — a Russian wife and an Indian husband — had a child named Stavyo, born in October 2020.
- The Supreme Court had ordered joint custody: the mother got custody from Monday to Wednesday, the father from Thursday to Sunday.
- On 7 July 2025, the mother disappeared with the child after school.
- The child missed medical check-ups, school, and football training — all required by court order.
- The father claimed she entered the Russian Embassy secretly and may be trying to flee the country with help from a diplomat.
- Police and officials were not acting, even after several complaints. The mother’s lawyer also gave false updates.
Legal Provisions Involved
- Article 32 of Constitution – Used to approach Supreme Court directly.
- Custody & Welfare Laws – Supreme Court protects the child’s well-being.
- Criminal Law – Ignoring court orders and hiding a child may involve penal offences.
- Diplomatic Law – The court avoided direct action on embassy staff but warned that the law will apply to everyone if any crime is found.
Arguments by Both Sides
Mother:
- Did not respond properly.
- Gave unclear replies through her lawyers.
- Disappeared with the child and became unreachable.
Father:
- Reported that the mother was missing along with the child.
- Shared full details with the Court, including her last location.
- Expressed fear that the child might be taken out of India.
- Highlighted how police and other officials were not taking action.
What the Court Observed
- The Court strongly criticised the mother’s conduct and her lawyer’s unhelpful attitude.
- It said that court orders were being disobeyed.
- It warned that even diplomats are not above the law if they help break Indian laws.
- The Russian Embassy was told to cooperate and avoid further complications.
Final Orders by the Court
- Delhi Police must find the child immediately and hand over custody to the father.
- MEA and MHA must issue Look Out Notices for both the mother and child.
- The mother’s passport must be seized without delay.
- The government should speak with the Russian Embassy to enter the place where the mother was last seen.
- All airports and immigration offices must be informed — the mother and child should not be allowed to leave India.
Next hearing: 18 July 2025
Men’s Rights Viewpoint (Simple Language)
This is one more case where a father had to struggle for basic justice. Even after court orders, he had to run to the Supreme Court when his child was taken away by the mother.
He did everything right — followed orders, raised complaints, shared proof. But no one listened until it became a national issue.
The mother went missing, broke court orders, and still there was no quick action by police. Would the same delay happen if a father had taken the child and vanished?
Why is the system so slow when the victim is a father?
Child custody rules should be equal for both parents. Breaking court orders and hiding a child is not okay — whether a father does it or a mother. It harms the child the most.
Final Thoughts:
This case is not just about custody. It shows how broken the system is when it comes to protecting a father’s role in a child’s life.
When a mother vanishes with a child, there’s silence, delay, and even protection from the system. The father, meanwhile, is made to fight for days, weeks — just to know where his child is.
Is that fair?
Is this how we treat responsible fathers?
Laws, courts, and police must realise — fathers matter too.
Shared parenting, court orders, and the child’s routine should not be treated like suggestions — they are legal duties. If one parent breaks them, there must be equal and immediate consequences, no matter their gender.
Children deserve both parents. And parents deserve fair treatment — not based on whether they’re the mother or the father, but based on what’s right.
Read Complete Judgment Here