Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Child's Right to Both Parents' Affection, Orders Video Conferencing Interactions: Delhi HC

04 September 2024 11:05 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment pronounced on August 17, 2023, the Delhi High Court underscored the paramount importance of a child's right to receive affection from both parents, upholding the significance of maintaining a strong parent-child bond even in cases of spatial separation. The verdict, rendered by a bench comprising Hon'ble Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon'ble Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, came as a response to an appeal lodged by Siddharth Govindani against a Family Court order declining his application for temporary custody of his minor child.

The High Court, after a meticulous analysis of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case, emphasized that a child's welfare and balanced growth must remain at the forefront of such disputes. The judgment cited a series of Supreme Court precedents that highlighted a child's inherent right to receive affection from both parents. The bench stressed that while permanent custody matters are under consideration, the child's access to both parents should not be curtailed.

High Court stated, "The child's best interest requires that he should have guidance and affection of his father in his formative years, for which he should have access to his father to develop affection." In a digital age, the court further acknowledged the practicality of using technology to facilitate interactions. Accordingly, the court ordered video conferencing interactions between the appellant-father and the minor child every Saturday and Sunday, during a flexible one-hour time frame from 11:00 am to 12:00 noon (Indian time).

The ruling also directed the learned Principal Judge of the Family Court to expedite the pending application related to custody and consider formulating a co-parenting plan that ensures effective and meaningful interactions between the father and the son. The court noted that the child's age and circumstances warranted a balanced approach to maintain the parent-child bond, even in the face of geographical separation.

This landmark decision serves as a precedent, highlighting the courts' commitment to safeguarding a child's well-being and emotional growth by upholding the importance of maintaining connections with both parents, regardless of physical distances. The judgment aims to strike a harmonious balance between the child's best interests and a father's affectionate involvement in the child's upbringing.

Date of Decision: August 17, 2023

SIDDHARTH GOVINDANI vs LEEPAKSHI

Latest Legal News