Step 1: Background.
In Githa Hariharan v. RBI (1999), the petitioner challenged the interpretation of “after” in Section 6(a) of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, which gave the father the natural guardianship “after” the mother.
Step 2: Supreme Court ruling.
The Court held that “after” does not mean “after the lifetime” but “in the absence” of the father, thus allowing the mother to act as a natural guardian during the father’s lifetime if he is absent or incapable.
\[
\boxed{(c)}
\]