'Conditions Shouldn't Be Illusory': Kerala High Court Sets Aside ₹75 Lakh Security Imposed On Mother Taking Child Abroad For Education
K. Salma Jennath
29 Jun 2026 5:54 PM IST
The Kerala High Court recently set aside two conditions imposed by the Family Court on a mother, who wanted to take her minor child to United Kingdom for better education and proper care for him. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 351]
The Family Court had ordered the mother to furnish security of Rs. 75 lakhs for taking the child to UK.
The Division Bench of Justice J. Nisha Banu and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed that conditions imposed by courts must not be “illusory” and the primary consideration must be the welfare of the child.
“The primary consideration which must weigh with the Court is the welfare of the child…Conditions should not be illusionary or incapable of compliance. The right of the child to good education cannot be scuttled by onerous financial burden,” the Court added.
The Court was considering an original petition preferred by the mother of a minor child challenging some of the conditions imposed.
Though the Family Court had found that the petitioner/mother is in a better financial position to care for the child and provide him better education, it directed her to furnish security of Rs.75 lakh for taking the child from India to UK and also directed her and her two sureties to execute a bond of Rs.7,50,000/- each.
Considering the case, the Court felt it appropriate to set aside the afore two conditions:
“After permitting the mother to take the child to the United Kingdom, the courts should not penalise custodial parents. There is no case alleged that the mother had violated any previous court order. The condition of ₹75 lakh now imposed only serves to deny the child a better educational opportunity. Thus, we find that the imposition of an exorbitant amount as security by the family court is liable to be set aside, as it does not subserve the best interests of the child. Such onerous conditions would place the mother in a position where compliance is impracticable, which would ultimately be detrimental to the child's welfare.”
Thus, the Court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner to file an undertaking that the other conditions imposed would be strictly complied with.
Case No: OP(FC) No. 285 of 2026
Case Title: N and Ors. v. S
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 351
Counsel for the petitioners: Prabhu K.N., Elizabeth Cyriac, Zanhar C., Akshara V. A., Dhilsha Habeeb, Christo Simon
