The Delhi High Court ruled that a parent cannot be denied access to children merely because they reside abroad. The Court granted businessman Amritesh Jatia interim custody of his two children in London during their summer vacation, stating parental time cannot be restricted without justification.
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a parent cannot be denied time with his children simply because they live abroad. The court observed that there was nothing on record to justify the view that the father could only spend time with the children in India and not in London.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Tejas Karia and Justice Madhu Jain accepted an appeal by businessman Amritesh Jatia and granted him interim custody of his two minor children in London from June 28 to July 5, 2026, during their summer vacation with their mother.
Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra appeared for the petitioner husband, along with Advocates Aadarsh Kothari and Aparna Bhadoria. The dispute followed an order of the Family Court, which had rejected Jatia’s application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking interim custody of the children in London. The Family Court had held that the father could instead spend time with the children in India before they left for the United Kingdom.
On appeal, the High Court found that approach unjustified. The Bench noted,
“The reasoning adopted by the learned Family Court, namely that the Appellant may spend time with the children only in India and not in London, is unsupported by any material on record,”
It also highlighted that the children had lived in London with both parents from 2015 to 2019 and were familiar with the city.
Counsel for the mother Advocates Manali Singhal, Shreya Singhal and Aanchal Kapoor opposed the interim arrangement. They argued that the father might abscond with the children and settle abroad. The mother claimed he had sold his shareholding in a hotel company, received more than Rs 110 crore outside India, and had offshore financial arrangements, raising the fear that he could move to Mauritius with the children. The High Court dismissed these concerns as speculative.
The Court stated,
“If the Appellant intended to permanently remove the children from India, such apprehension would equally arise even when the children are with him during a vacation in India,”
It further pointed out that the children’s passports were in the mother’s custody and observed that it was “highly unlikely” that duplicate passports could be obtained in London without the mother’s knowledge or consent.
The mother also contended that the father should not be allowed to take the children to London because he had not borne the travel expenses and that her parents had paid for the trip. She further alleged that the father had never travelled alone with the children and lacked the ability to care for them independently. The High Court found these objections to have little substance, noting that the mother had no issue with the father spending time with the children in India.
The Bench observed,
“If the Appellant can take care of the children in India, there is no reason why he cannot do so while in London as well,”
The High Court emphasized that custody disputes should focus on the welfare of the children rather than location-based considerations or unverified apprehensions. The court recognized the importance of ensuring the children maintain meaningful relationships with both parents, even while matrimonial proceedings remain pending.
To address the parties’ competing concerns, the court imposed safeguards. It directed the father to reimburse the full cost of the children’s return air tickets by June 25, failing which he would not be entitled to the interim custody benefit. The court ordered that the passports would remain with the mother and that the father would be restrained from taking the children outside London during the custody period.
The court ordered,
“The Respondent shall hand over custody of the children to the Appellant at 9:00 AM on 28.06.2026, at a place in London to be decided by the Respondent and communicated to the Appellant by 5:00 PM on 27.06.2026. The Appellant shall hand over custody of the children back to the Respondent at 5:00 PM on 05.07.2026, at a place in London to be decided by the Respondent and communicated to the Appellant by 5:00 PM on 04.07.2026,”
Consequently, the High Court set aside the Family Court’s order and granted the father interim custody of the children in London for one week during their summer break.
Case Title: Amritesh Jatia v. Vidhi Jatia