Delhi High Court Upholds Mother's Right to Relocate Child to Abu Dhabi Amid Custody Dispute
The court emphasizes child welfare as paramount, balancing employment opportunities with non-custodial parent's access rights
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal by Esam Ahmad Bilgrami challenging a Family Court's interim order allowing his former spouse, Aaliyah Saeed Dang, to relocate their minor child to Abu Dhabi. The decision underscores the judicial emphasis on the welfare of the child as the overriding consideration in custody and guardianship disputes.
The judgment, delivered by the bench comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, upheld the Family Court's order permitting the relocation of the child, Master Emad Ahmad Bilgrami, with his mother, subject to certain safeguards ensuring continued access for the father. The court reiterated that the child's welfare, including emotional and psychological stability, should take precedence over the competing claims of the parents.
The dispute arose from the dissolution of the marriage between the parties, with the father contending that an affidavit signed by the mother at the time of their divorce relinquished her custody rights. However, the court found that the document's authenticity was not conclusively established, and emphasized the child's established caregiving arrangement with the mother since 2014.
The Family Court's decision, initially challenged by the father, allowed the mother to relocate to Abu Dhabi, where she secured employment, arguing that the move would enhance the child's living conditions and financial stability. The High Court agreed, noting that the relocation was justified by genuine reasons and did not constitute a final adjudication on custody rights.
The judgment further highlighted the safeguards put in place by the Family Court to mitigate concerns of estrangement, including regular video conferencing and visitation during school vacations. These measures were deemed adequate to maintain the child's relationship with the non-custodial parent.
The High Court, aligning with precedents such as Ritika Sharan v. Sujoy Ghosh, emphasized that while the rights of the non-custodial parent are important, they must be balanced against the child's best interests. The court acknowledged that the child's settled environment and emotional security with the mother were critical factors in deciding the case.
While the father's appeal raised concerns about diminished physical access and the adequacy of virtual contact, the court found that the Family Court had imposed reasonable safeguards to protect visitation rights. It noted that the mother's employment contract in Abu Dhabi was for a fixed term, reinforcing the provisional nature of the interim order.
The ruling is a reminder of the judicial approach towards custody and guardianship matters, focusing on the holistic welfare of the child rather than the individual preferences of the parents. By upholding the Family Court's order, the Delhi High Court has reinforced the principle that child welfare must be the touchstone in adjudicating such disputes, ensuring that the child's physical, emotional, moral, and educational well-being is prioritized.
The decision concludes the current legal battle, allowing the mother to continue her role as the primary caregiver in Abu Dhabi, while ensuring that the father's rights to access and visitation are safeguarded.
Esam Ahmad Bilgrami v. Aaliyah Saeed Dang, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2776125
