In my view, this is rather an exaggerated rating of the judgement. In the present case, the apex court did not address this issue. The question before the court was a limited one, whether mothers could also be deemed as natural guardians during the lifetime of their husbands. A point to note is that only when the father has abdicated his responsibility or by consent agreed to elevate the mother to the status of a natural guardian would the judgement come into effect. But in keenly contested custody battles, this judgment will not be relevant.
Several misconceptions govern issues of custody in matrimonial disputes.
This article is an attempt to clear some of them. Guardianship implies the proprietorial rights, and custody implies the responsibility of raising a child. By mid-twentieth century, the principle became one of the primary pillars of the family law in England. The courts held that the aim of matrimonial litigation is not to punish the guilty but only to ensure the welfare of the child. While S.19 stipulated that father is the natural guardian of the minor, S.17 prescribed that the welfare of the child is paramount.