Recently, the Supreme Court clarified that in a sensitive child custody dispute, visitation rights must prioritize the emotional and mental well-being of the minor. The Court intervened in a case concerning a father seeking interaction with his son, who is living with his mother in Ireland, and held that while custody cannot be disturbed at this stage, the father is entitled to regular video-conferencing to maintain a meaningful relationship with the child. The Court emphasized that the child’s welfare and stability must remain paramount, regardless of the long-standing parental conflicts.
Brief Facts:
The dispute arose from a long-standing matrimonial conflict between the appellant father and the respondent mother. The couple married in 2012 and had a son in 2016. The mother left the matrimonial home in 2017 and subsequently filed for divorce. The father initially sought custody of the child through the Family Court, which partially allowed limited visitation. Later attempts at a mutual consent divorce with agreed custody arrangements failed.
Over the years, the father filed multiple petitions seeking custody and interaction with his child. During these proceedings, the child was taken to Ireland by the mother, where he has been living since 2017. The father approached the High Court seeking various remedies, including disclosure of the child’s travel details, video interactions, and ultimately, the return of the child. The High Court dismissed his appeal, citing the father’s breach of interim orders and noting that the mother had been capable of caring for the child. Aggrieved, the father filed the present appeal before the Supreme Court.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The father, through his counsel, limited his appeal to seeking the right to interact with his son via video-conferencing. He argued that despite living apart and in different countries, a child’s relationship with both parents is essential. Denying such contact, he contended, would deprive the child of the father’s emotional support, guidance, and love.
Observations of the Court:
The Apex Court observed that disputes between parents should not compromise the welfare of the child. The Court noted that, “The emotional, mental, and physical well-being of the child must always come first. The conduct of both parents has not been ideal, yet the child cannot become a casualty of this conflict. What matters most is that the child grows up in an atmosphere where he feels secure, loved, and cared for.”
Further, the Court recognized that the child was settled in Ireland with the mother and that disturbing this arrangement was not in the child’s interest. However, it acknowledged the father’s right to maintain a meaningful relationship, observing, “Every child has a right to the affection of both parents. Even if parents live apart or in different countries, it is important for the child to maintain a relationship with both of them. Denying such contact would deprive the child of the love, guidance, and emotional support of the father.”
The decision of the Court:
The Top Court directed that the father be allowed video interaction with his son for two hours every alternate Sunday, Ireland time, from 10:00 AM to 12:00 noon. Both parents were instructed to cooperate in good faith to facilitate these sessions, and any technical or logistical issues were to be resolved with the child’s interest as paramount. With this arrangement, the appeal was disposed of, ensuring the father remains an active part of the child’s life while respecting the child’s current living situation.
Case Title: Manoj Dhankar Vs. State of U.P and Ors.
Case No.: SLP (C) No. - 25029 Of 2025
Coram: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Pradeep Rai (Sr. Adv.), Suryadeep Singh, Ayaan Thakur, S. Vinay Ratnakar, AOR, Farhat Naim
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Sandeep Narain, Kanak Malik, M/S. S. Narain & Co. (AOR)
Picture Source :
