Suhasinni
Violence is not the reason Ritu gave - the reason she gave was that she had moved on, and had no wish to return to her husband. So her husband asked for Bubbly. If he threatened to take sole custody of her, that would be wrong, but the least he deserved was joint custody. Not that I'm justifying it, but he only turned violent when he lost his case in court, and didn't handle the fact that he couldn't have his daughter any more. A lot of people would react pretty violently on being forcibly separated from their kids. Part of the blame does fall on him for divorcing even though he had a 2 year old, but just b'cos someone is a bad hubby does not necessarily imply that he'll be a bad father.
In the US, he would have ended up w/ joint custody the first time he divorced, and he would only have lost that had it been proved that he was an abusive father. In India, afaik, the law generally gives sons to their fathers and daughters to their moms, which is probably how Ritu won out.
My point - these 2 had their fight, but at the end of the day, Bubbly's sentiments are ignored, and honestly, Ritu's answer - that she'll have a lot of friends like Jyoti who'll substitute for her dad is - I'm sorry, just horse-manure!
Also, the discussion here has been on whether the mothers should give up their babies when they are just born, not whether they should give up a kid that's already grown up w/ them some. If the kid is posthumous, the mom should either re-marry, or adopt out. In this case, however, it's easier to explain to the kid that dad died - friends won't think any less of his/her family. But they will when words like divorce or abandoned or abuse are bandied about.