The Supreme Court, along with Justice Indu Malhotra, Hemant Gupta, and UU Lalit, in the case of Perry Kansagra v. Smriti Madan Kansagra, applied the concept of ‘mirror order’ in a case filed for child custody of a child.
If the foreign parent is found to have Child Custody and is allowed by the court to transfer the child to a foreign country, then the court shall make a condition on those parents to obtain a similar order for custody from the competent court there. Can also apply. We know this as ‘Mirror Order’. This is done to make the foreign court aware of the case and ensure the safety of a child.
The main purpose of the mirror order is to ensure the safety and interest of a minor child who will be transferred from one jurisdiction to another and also to ensure that both parents are equally bound by each state. The Darpan order ensures that the courts in whichever country the child is shifting are well aware of all the arrangements made in the country in which the child is already implicated. This concept also ensures the interest of the guardian, who has lost custody, so that his or her rights to move the child are not violated in any way. “
Appellate mother Smriti is an Indian citizen, who was a practicing lawyer before her marriage in New Delhi to defendant Perry. Father Perry is of Indian descent, and of Gujarati descent, whose family shifted to Kenya long ago and settled there for the final three generations in 1935 when his grandfather moved.
Perry and his family have settled in Kenya, where they have established a large business establishment in the UK and Kenya, and Perry holds dual citizenship of Kenya and UK Smriti married Perry in New Delhi and later Nairobi, Relocated to Kenya. Settled in his matrimonial home. Both parents later wanted custody of the child and filed an appeal.
The custody of the child should remain with the mother while the father has the right. It is one of the legal decisions in India.
b’Perry_Kansagra_vs_Smriti_Madan_Kansagra_on_15_February,_2019′
