Orissa High Court Overturns Family Court's Ruling on Visitation Rights, Emphasizes Child's Welfare

Father's Right to Visit Son Reaffirmed; Case Sent Back for Re-evaluation with Child's Best Interests in Mind

In a significant ruling, the Orissa High Court has set aside a Family Court's decision that denied a father's visitation rights to his minor son. The High Court, presided over by Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra, emphasized the paramount importance of a child's welfare and the necessity for both parents to be involved in their child's life, barring extreme circumstances.

The case originated when Sanjay Sharma sought visitation rights to see his seven-year-old son, Shivay Sharma, after a mutual agreement with his ex-wife, Dolly @ Sakhi Sharma, was allegedly breached. The parents had initially agreed that their daughter would stay with the mother and the son with the father, with mutual visitation rights. However, the agreement fell apart when Dolly took Shivay from school, refusing further contact with Sanjay.

The Family Court in Cuttack had denied Sanjay's application for visitation rights, citing the absence of a neutral venue and potential risks of untoward incidents. However, Justice Mishra found this decision to be unjust and contrary to established legal principles regarding child welfare and parental rights. He highlighted that visitation rights are a crucial aspect of parental involvement, necessary for a child's psychological and emotional development.

Justice Mishra referenced previous judgments, including the Supreme Court's stance in Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan, which underscores that a child's basic human right includes receiving love and care from both parents, regardless of parental disputes. The court also drew parallels with a recent Orissa High Court ruling that reinforced the need for visitation rights to ensure a child's holistic development.

The High Court's decision mandates the Family Court to reconsider Sanjay Sharma's application, ensuring the arrangement is in the best interest of Shivay, allowing for proper consultation with both parents and their legal representatives. The interim order allowing Sanjay to communicate with Shivay via calls or WhatsApp remains in place until a final decision is reached.

This ruling is a reminder of the judiciary's role in safeguarding children's rights amidst parental conflicts, ensuring that custody and visitation decisions prioritize the child's welfare above all else.

Bottom Line:

Visitation rights are a vital aspect of parental rights and must be decided based on the best interests of the child - Courts must ensure that children born out of wedlock are not deprived of love, affection, and company of either parent.

Statutory provision(s):- Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Section 6

Sanjay Sharma v. Dolly @ Sakhi Sharma, (Orissa) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2792872