VIOLATING SC GUIDELINES
Woman denied child custody for being HIV+
Published on Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:55, Updated on Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 13:02 in India section
Tags: Jaipur, HIV Positive , Jaipur

![]() |


Related Stories
Education reform will be for all Indians: Sibal 
Federer wins record-breaking 15th Grand Slam title | Photogallery
Budget preview: Promises to keep | What to expect and what not 
One-upmanship: Sonia, Pawar in foodgrain politics 
5 feared dead in Madhya Pradesh factory explosions
Policemen guard Maya's statue wealth across UP 
Youth shot dead by cops had 26 injury marks | Watch 
CPI-M leaders to act to curb Kerala infighting
Recruiter of child suicide bombers held in Afghan
Paes-Black lose Wimbledon mixed doubles final
Jaipur: It's just a photograph of her nine-year-old daughter that a Jaipur-based HIV positive woman has seen for almost two years now. Infected by her husband, who died in 2003, she was forcibly separated from the child by her in-laws in 2005.
However, the real blow for her came a week ago when a trial court in Jaipur denied her the child's custody on the grounds that she is HIV positive and hence cannot look after the child.
"They say I can't look after her. When her grandparents, who are in their 70s can look after her, then why can't I? And I have already said that as long as I am alive, my child should be with me and then with whoever she wishes to stay with," says the woman.
Adds Secretary People's Union for Civil Liberties Jaipur, Kavita Shrivastava, "What they have ended up doing is violating her mother's natural guardian right, which the Supreme Court has over and over again held for women. The court has denied her this right and that too on a discriminatory ground that she's HIV positive."
And as if losing her child wasn't enough, the HIV positive woman also has to contend with what she feels is an insensitive attitude of the court.
While passing its order, the court had made her identity public.
Experts say it's a contravention of Article 14 of the Constitution, and of a Supreme Court directive on keeping identities of HIV positive persons confidential.
Says the victim's lawyer, Ajay Kumar Jain, "The trial court has refused to conceal the identity of the woman though a specific prayer was made by her in this regard."
Women's groups have now stepped in on the victim's behalf and filed an appeal against the order. They are also demanding compensation for the damages she's incurred because of the trauma.
Meanwhile, the Additional District and Sessions Judge Court has stayed the trial court's order and the next date of hearing has been set for October 11.
| Ads by Google |
| Related Ads: | |















Read Comment | Post Comment
Passing judgment on others is very easy. One has to secure the future of the child from hiv+ person. Will
Read Comment
This women needs moral support at this stage, this shows the people are still not aware of HIV,
Read Comment
Please have the person delivering the verdict sacked. Let us have accountability to the highest level.
If the system who
Read Comment
HIV is not transferable by mere physical contact. So whether the mother is HIV positive or not, she deserves custody
Read Comment
I dont think the judiciary is doing right by denying a mother's rigth over her child.the lady is innocent and
Read Comment
Read more comment »