Most of these aren't relevant reasons reasons in a custody case. In actual the only real point birlas can use against sharmas is sharmas are not rich. That is it. Because other than financial struggles but still managing to meet abhi's basic needs which is what most family courts in reality are more concerned about, sharmas have provided abhir with a stable, emotionally secure and safe environment/ household/ upbringing where he is taken good care of, all his needs attended to etc. They have been good parents and there is no proof for birlas to show that sharmas are incapable of raising a child or a danger to the child when they've done so for 6 years.
Also abhir considers akshara and abhinav his parents and is attached to them. He may love company of abhimanyu but he does not know they are his paternal family at all and just for satisfying adult egos and squabbles a child can't simply be uprooted from his stable and secure family/ household he has been raised in and handed off to people who till now have had no involvement in his upbringing. I don't trust itv to be logical but most courts would not take the decision of uprooting a child from the home and family they were raised in unless there is a major concern for the child's safety and/ or wellbeing where he is living at the moment.
Abhi divorcing and abandoning his wife who just miscarried a few hours ago then never going to look for her, contact her, then yelling at her when she tried to contact him that he wants nothing to do with her or her child is a big and valid point that can be used against abhimanyu because it can be used to prove he has major anger issues and is neglectful and emotionally abusive and not capable of providing a emotionally secure and stable family environment to a child who has had that up until now whilst living with his mother.
Also can be brought up maybe that he is about to marry his son's aunt to become the father to his niece and the fact his niece is very overposessive about him and his to-be-wife and roohi may not make things easier for abhir if he lives with abhimanyu as arohi and roohi expect and demand abhimanyu to only prioritise roohi, so question marks can be raised on whether abhimanyu can ensure abhir won't be neglected by him under pressure and demands of his future wife and her daughter, using even the incident with roohi in camp as an example. Whereas there are no concerns of him facing any such neglect in sharmas as he has been secure and well looked after by sharmas till date.
More than finances, meeting child's basic needs and the biggest factor is the emotional stability and safety of the home and environment that a parent can provide which is the most important concern for family courts.
CID
Music Corner
662