In a crucial ruling that impacts matrimonial and family law, the Supreme Court has held that a parent’s ability to work from home does not give them an upper hand in child custody disputes. The judgment was delivered in the case A v. B by a Division Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan on November 25, 2025.

The case originated from a custody battle over a minor son. While the Family Court initially granted custody to the mother when the child was under five, the Punjab and Haryana High Court later overturned this, partly influenced by the fact that the father worked from home while the mother had long working hours. The mother appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing this created an unfair bias.

A key focus of the article is the Supreme Court’s recent directions in We the Women of India v. Union of India. The Court expressed serious concern over administrative failures, particularly the inadequate appointment of Protection Officers responsible for assisting victims. It directed states to ensure these officers are in place, notify shelter homes, and facilitate access to legal aid. This highlights a systemic truth: a powerful law fails if the administrative machinery to support it is weak.

The Supreme Court firmly rejected the High Court’s reasoning. It observed, “It is a matter of common knowledge that to meet individual as well as family aspirations married couples have to work… this cannot be a ground to place the child’s custody with the parent who may be temporarily working from home.” The Bench emphasized that in modern times, both parents often need to work to secure their family’s future and their children’s education, and a temporary work arrangement cannot be the basis for a lifelong decision like custody.

The Court also dismissed other factors raised by the High Court, such as minor differences in school commute times or the mother traveling abroad during the COVID-19 pandemic. It noted that travel for work or even for vacations is normal and necessary for a person’s well-being, and no adverse inference should be drawn from it.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the mother’s appeal. However, this decision was not based on the work-from-home argument. It was heavily influenced by the child’s own wishes—the minor son, now over five, was well-settled with his father and grandparents and was unwilling to be separated from them. The Court upheld the mother’s visitation rights and clarified that the High Court’s order did not close the door for her to seek custody through future proceedings.

Ms. Preeti Singh (of PS Law Advocates & Solicitors) appeared as counsel for the petitioner in this matter, representing the mother before the Supreme Court. The judgment serves as a key precedent, ensuring that flexible work arrangements are not misused as a determining factor in sensitive child custody cases, while reaffirming that the child’s welfare and wishes remain paramount.

For More Details, click here

If you’re seeking the best divorce lawyer in Gurgaon, look no further than PS Laws. Our team is here to provide you with expert legal representation and unwavering support during this pivotal time.

PS Law Advocates & Solicitors (Preeti Singh & Associates)

Phone: [+91 93124 11311]
Email: [info@pslaw.co.in]
Website: [https://pslaw.co.in/]

PS Laws—where expertise meets compassion. Contact us today to schedule a consultation and take the first step toward a new beginning.