Child’s Well-Being”: Supreme Court Disallows Mother’s Presence During Father’s Visitation Rights

Post By 24law
January 29, 2025

Pranav B Prem

In a significant judgment concerning child custody matters, the Supreme Court has emphasized the necessity of mutual respect and collaboration between parents to ensure the well-being of the child. The Court observed that effective cooperation and communication are pivotal for the smooth implementation of visitation arrangements.

A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale dismissed a plea by a mother seeking permission to be present during visitation meetings between her 13-year-old daughter and the father. The meetings are set to occur during the pendency of the case. “We understand the concerns of a mother of a teenage daughter, especially one who has made serious allegations against her husband. Thus, as urged by petitioner no.1 that the safety of the child be ensured and as suggested by the respondent, we deem it appropriate that a Court appointed Commissioner, who shall be a female, shall be present at all times during the visitation meetings,” the bench stated.

The Court observed that such an arrangement strikes a fair balance between the child’s need for stability, her safety and welfare, and the father’s right to meaningful involvement in her life. “Both parents are reminded of their duty to prioritize the child’s welfare and work collaboratively to create a nurturing and supportive environment for the child,” the bench added.

Background of the Case

The case arose from a Chhattisgarh High Court order dated May 11, 2022, which expanded the visitation rights of the father while maintaining sole custody with the mother. Petitioner No. 1 (the mother) and the respondent (the father) were married on January 16, 2007, and their daughter was born in 2012. Since the separation in 2016, the child has been residing with her mother, who has been the primary caregiver. The Family Court had earlier granted limited visitation rights to the father, restricting his access to one and a half hours on the first Sunday of every month and specific holidays. Aggrieved by these limitations, the father appealed to the High Court, which expanded his visitation rights to include longer meeting hours, fortnightly physical meetings, shared vacation time, and regular video calls.

Concerns Raised by the Mother

The mother challenged the expanded visitation schedule, citing concerns about the child’s safety and emotional stability. She argued that extended visits could disrupt the child’s routine, academic performance, and extracurricular activities. Additionally, she highlighted the father’s alleged history of abusive behavior, criminal charges, and past conflicts during visitations, asserting that these factors made the revised arrangement unsafe for the child.

Father’s Defense

The father defended the High Court’s order, asserting that the expanded visitation arrangement was in the child’s best interest. He claimed that the mother had manipulated the child and influenced her views, thereby limiting his ability to build a relationship. He emphasized that the revised schedule would allow him to strengthen his bond with the child, which he deemed essential for her overall development.

Supreme Court’s Observations and Interim Arrangement

While the Supreme Court refrained from delving into the merits of the allegations made by both parties, it stressed the importance of the child’s safety and welfare. “Since both the parties have made severe allegations against each other to bring forth their individual concerns for the physical safety and mental wellbeing of the child while in the company of the opposite parent, we will not go into the merits of these allegations as several cases are still pending between the parties and we are yet to hear the petition on merits,” the Court noted.

To address the mother’s concerns while ensuring the father’s visitation rights, the Court directed that a female Court-appointed Commissioner be present during all visitation meetings. These meetings are to take place in public spaces, with the child’s custody being returned to the mother at the end of each visitation. The Court clarified, “The weeklong and overnight stays cannot be allowed in the interim, since the challenge of the petitioner no. 1 before this Court is mainly on those arrangements and thus the issue remains open for hearing before us.”

Interim Visitation Schedule

The Court allowed the following interim visitation arrangements to continue during the pendency of the petition:

The father or grandparents are allowed to engage with the child via a suitable video conferencing platform for one hour every Saturday and Sunday, and for 5-10 minutes on other days.

Both parents are required to procure smartphones to facilitate seamless video calling.

On a fortnightly basis, the child is to be produced before the Family Court, Durg, from where the father can take her for the entire day. The child must be returned to the mother the same evening in the presence of the Court-appointed Commissioner.

During vacations, the child is entitled to spend one day (9 a.m. to 9 p.m.) with the father or grandparents.