The Supreme Court has ruled that a father’s visitation rights must not compromise a child’s health and well-being in a custody dispute case. It modified previous orders, allowing visitations to occur in Madurai rather than Karur, emphasizing the child’s best interests and practical considerations while acknowledging the father’s emotional distress in missing his child.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday (30th December) emphasized that a father’s visitation rights cannot be enforced at the expense of a child’s health and well-being. A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and PB Varale delivered this crucial verdict while modifying interim visitation arrangements in a custody battle between estranged parents.
The ruling shows the importance of prioritizing a child’s best interests in custody disputes, setting a precedent for future cases.
The case involved a custody dispute over a minor child between her estranged parents, both doctors. Married in 2021, the couple had a daughter in 2022. However, marital discord led to the mother filing for divorce in 2023, citing cruelty and domestic violence.
During the divorce proceedings, the father sought visitation rights. A family court granted his plea and directed the mother to bring the child from Madurai, where they resided, to Karur, the father’s city, every Sunday for a two-hour visitation.
The mother challenged this order before the Madras High Court, arguing that the weekly 150-kilometer journey would harm the child’s health. Despite her objections, the High Court extended the visitation duration to four hours each Sunday in Karur.
The mother then approached the Supreme Court, contending that the visitation arrangement was burdensome for the child and failed to consider her well-being.
The Supreme Court modified the High Court’s order, relocating the visitation site from Karur to Madurai. The Court firmly stated,
“The interest of the minor child is paramount. In the process of adjudicating upon the rights of the parents, her health cannot be compromised. Further, while the respondent has the right to visit the child, it cannot be at the cost of the child’s health and well-being.”
Key Factors in the Decision
- Health of the Child: The Court recognized the physical toll on the young child due to the weekly travel between Madurai and Karur.
- Best Interests of the Child: While acknowledging the father’s rights as a natural guardian, the Court emphasized that these rights cannot override the child’s welfare.
- Practicality of Visitation Arrangements: The Supreme Court found the visitation orders by the lower courts unnecessarily burdensome and lacking in justification.
The Court directed that visitation take place in Madurai, where the child resides. It specified that the father could meet the child every Sunday for four hours at a public park or temple in Madurai. The mother would be present at a safe distance to ensure the child’s comfort and security.
The Court also acknowledged the father’s emotional pain, stating,
“The agony of missing his child’s childhood cannot be prolonged, but the same cannot override the interest of the child.”
Case Title: SUGIRTHA vs. GOWTHAM
Read the Order here:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
