Anil Kumble Misrepresents Webster's and Oxford Dictionary and Defames Biological Fathers
Family Law, Child Custody decision by Courts and the Celebrity Factor in India and abroad
The strange parental life of Wacko Jacko aka Michael Jackson makes us wonder about the Child Custody decisions taken by courts for Celebrities versus the other regular mortals. Michael Jackson was leading a weird lifestyle with marital discord, alleged child abuse and paedophilia, bisexuality and drug abuse. Despite these circumstances, Michael Jackson was allowed to bring forth three children into the world of questionable parentage. And, that too, after bringing yet another child into the world from a woman in an existing marriage.
Do the laws of the land and morality apply differently for celebrities and lesser mortals?
These questions bring us to the quirky laws in our own country and to the Child custody battle of Mrs Chetana Kumble (current wife of Anil Kumble) and Mr Kumar Jahgirdar (the first husband) over their daughter.
Did Anil Kumble’s celebrity play a role in the previous Child Custody decisions taken by the Court?
The earlier Court decisions negatively impacted the biological father, by noting that Kumar Jahagirdar had ‘no female companion/relative’ to take care of his daughter. Does a BIOLOGICAL FATHER need a female escort to monitor his movements with his own biological daughter (in the absence of any allegation of Child abuse)? Can Mr Kumar Jahagirdar not be a better Father than Michael Jackson?
The laws relating to families have changed abroad as judges and legislators have revised the legal issues involved in divorce, child custody, child support, domestic violence and other family law matters. Family law has become entangled in national debates over family structure, gender bias and morality.
Issues such as child custody have also advanced in the courts as cultural and societal attitudes have changed. Mothers have been favored in many custody disputes of the past, but fathers are given much more consideration than in the past.
Custody battles, while always difficult and emotional, have become even more complicated as reproductive technology has increased the ways in which people can become parents.
Family law lawyers and judges are faced with new, difficult and sensitive questions such as who gets custody of fertilized embryos when a couple that was involved in infertility/assisted-reproduction treatments separates. Surrogate parenting also presents custody issues when the surrogate fails to abide by the surrogacy contract or wants visitation with the child. Equally difficult issues can arise when sperm or egg donors make some claim to their genetic offspring. These issues involve questions relating not only to custody laws, but also to those involving adoption, children’s rights and paternity.
Another major change in family law in recent years is the recognition that many family disputes can be resolved through alternative dispute methods, such as mediation, as opposed to the traditional litigation process. As a result, many states have begun to explore other, non-adversarial alternatives, such as mandatory mediation in family law cases, which can save time and money and help maintain relationships.
How does a court decide which parent will get custody of a child?
When the parents cannot agree on a custody arrangement, the court will make the decision for them. When determining the child’s best interests, the court may consider may factors, including the following:
The child’s age
The child’s gender
The child’s physical and mental health
The parents’ physical and mental health
The parents’ lifestyles
Any history of abuse
The emotional bonds between the parent and the child
The parent’s ability to give the child guidance
The parent’s ability to provide the basic necessities, such as food, shelter, clothing and medical care
The child’s routines, including home, school, community and religious
The willingness of the parent to encourage a healthy, on-going relationship between the child and the other parent
If the child is above a certain age, the child’s preference
Who has been the child’s primary caretaker?
Biological Fathers, who have committed to bringing their Legitimate children into the world after a ‘process’ which includes a Committed Marriage with the mother (and now ex-wife), deserve more respect than Celebrities like Michael Jackson who have brought children into the world by questionable means. And, the least a Biological Father needs is Equal Custody (and not visitation) and the opportunity to shower love & affection to their biological children.
There needs to be changes in Family Law which respects Pro-family Biological Fathers like Kumar Jahgirdar who are committed to their legitimate offsprings. And, ‘other’ Fathers like Michael Jackson can wait after justice is delivered to Legitimate, Biological Fathers.
The former leggie had maintained a dignified silence on charges of ‘forgery’ on his minor daughter’s passport application. Recently, he responded to the police notice
February 05, 2012
Fast and precise rather than wild curve or vicious spin, was how Anil Kumble delivered his legbreaks on the cricket pitch. The former India captain gave city police a glimpse of those qualities when replying to a charge that he had forged the signature of the biological father of his stepdaughter.
In a passport application for his stepdaughter, Kumble had signed under the column ‘Father’. Kumar V Jaghirdhar, the biological father of Kumble’s stepdaughter, had accused Kumble of impersonating him.
In his reply to a police notice on the issue, Kumble states that he had neither pretended to be the natural father nor had he impersonated Jaghirdhar.
To prove his point that he was merely guardian of a minor child, Kumble quoted from Webster’s and the Oxford dictionaries.
Kumble’s letter to the police states, “The dictionary meaning of the word ‘father’ as defined in Webster’s, along with other meanings also says, ‘father is one who performs the office of a parent by maintenance, affectionate care, counsel, or protection’. The Oxford dictionary states the meaning as, ‘a man who provides care and protection’.”
Kumble has remained tight-lipped on the issue, but in his letter, a copy of which is with Bangalore Mirror, he states, “In the passport application filed on behalf of the child, I have not described myself as either natural or biological father. I have simply signed as Anil Kumble. It clearly mentions Kumar V Jaghirdhar and Smt Chethana Kumble only, and not daughter of Anil Kumble.”
The letter goes on to state, “I have signed to undertake the entire responsibility of her expenses only. As Annexure H is a prescribed proforma and there is no other column, I only signed as a person who is protecting and taking care of the minor child who is staying with us.”
Kumble also refutes the claim that his wife was party to the alleged crime. He wrote that Jaghirdhar’s allegations against his wife are “far from the truth” and termed them “false and baseless” and aimed at “trying to tarnish my image”.
In December last year, Jaghirdhar had complained to the Bharatinagar police claiming that Kumble had impersonated him as the father of the minor daughter and his former wife, Chethana, had abetted the offence.
The police did not file an FIR immediately, but sought a legal opinion. They also sent a notice to Kumble. The former Test cricketer replied to the notice on January 2, 2012, but police did not divulge details of the reply.
In his legal opinion, Chandrashekhar G Hiremath, the deputy director of prosecution, had advised the police against filing an FIR.
Hiremath’s opinion also states that Kumble had declared himself to be the guardian of the minor child and had not forged the signature of Jaghirdhar as alleged.
The police refused to file an FIR, but Jaghirdhar approached the High Court of Karnataka seeking it to direct the police to file an FIR and investigate his complaint. The police filed objections in their defence on January 28 in the HC and attached the copies of the letters of Anil Kumble and Hiremath. The case will come up for hearing again on February 6.