Child Custody and Visitation Rights: Supreme Court Enhances Mother’s Access to Daughter

The case of Amyra Dwivedi (Minor) Through Her Mother, Smt. Pooja Sharma Dwivedi v. Abhinav Dwivedi & Anr. addresses a significant issue concerning child custody and visitation rights. The Supreme Court was called upon to determine whether a mother’s visitation rights, as granted by the High Court, were adequate for maintaining a meaningful relationship with her child.

The Supreme Court observed that the High Court’s order restricting the mother’s visitation to just two hours per month in a legal office setting was neither sufficient nor in the best interest of the child. It reaffirmed that the welfare of the child is of paramount consideration in custody disputes and granted expanded visitation rights to the mother.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose when the mother, Smt. Pooja Sharma Dwivedi, filed a habeas corpus petition in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, seeking custody of her minor daughter, who was living with the father and paternal grandparents in Lucknow. The High Court dismissed the petition but granted limited visitation rights, allowing the mother to meet the child for only two hours once a month at the District Legal Services Authority office.

Unsatisfied with this arrangement, the mother approached the Supreme Court, arguing that such limited access was insufficient to maintain a meaningful bond with her daughter.

Key Legal Issues

• Whether the High Court’s restricted visitation rights provided the mother with adequate access to her child.
• Whether a child’s welfare is best served by allowing broader interaction with both parents.
• What should be the appropriate visitation schedule for the mother?

Arguments by the Petitioner (Mother)

The mother contended that:

• Meeting the child for only two hours a month was grossly inadequate and deprived the child of maternal love and affection.
• The office of the District Legal Services Authority was not a conducive environment for nurturing a parent-child relationship.
• Regular interaction with both parents is essential for a child’s emotional and psychological well-being.
• The court should consider a more comprehensive and structured visitation schedule that includes overnight stays and vacations.

Arguments by the Respondents (Father and Grandparents)

The father and grandparents opposed the mother’s petition, arguing that:

• The existing visitation arrangement was adequate.
• The child had settled into a routine in Lucknow, and frequent visits with the mother might disrupt her stability.
• Extended visitation could lead to unnecessary emotional distress for the child.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court criticized the High Court’s restrictive order and emphasized that both parents should have sufficient access to their child. The Court referenced its earlier ruling in Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan (2020), which recognized that a child has a fundamental right to love, affection, and care from both parents.

“A child, especially a child of tender years, requires the love, affection, company, and protection of both parents. Just because the parents are at war with each other does not mean that the child should be denied the care, affection, love, or protection of either parent.”

The Court further stated that visitation rights must be structured in a way that facilitates a healthy relationship between the child and both parents. It ruled that the mother should be granted extended visitation rights, including weekends and vacations.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court modified the visitation schedule as follows:

• The mother is entitled to meet the child on both Saturdays and Sundays for a period of eight weeks. She may take the child from the grandparents’ home at 10:00 AM and return her at 5:00 PM.
• After eight weeks, the mother may have overnight custody of the child on weekends from Saturday morning until Sunday evening.
• On major festivals such as Holi and Diwali, the mother will have access to the child for at least four hours in the evening.
• During summer vacations, the mother can take the child for seven days if the vacation period is more than 15 days, and for 15 days if the vacation extends beyond a month.
• The mother is permitted to attend all school functions, including parent-teacher meetings, and will be informed of the child’s academic progress.
• The mother can make daily video or telephone calls to the child between 7:30 PM and 8:30 PM.

Conclusion

This ruling sets a crucial precedent for child custody disputes, affirming the principle that:

• A child’s best interest is paramount, and both parents should play an active role in their upbringing.
• Visitation arrangements must be meaningful and facilitate bonding between the child and both parents.
• Courts should ensure that non-custodial parents have sufficient access to maintain an emotional connection with their child.

The judgment reinforces that legal battles between parents should not deprive a child of the love and presence of either parent. The Supreme Court’s decision ensures that the child’s right to have a nurturing relationship with both parents is upheld.

Petitioner Name: Amyra Dwivedi (Minor) Through Her Mother, Smt. Pooja Sharma Dwivedi.
Respondent Name: Abhinav Dwivedi & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Deepak Gupta, Justice Aniruddha Bose.
Place Of Incident: Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 06-03-2020.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Amyra Dwivedi (Minor vs Abhinav Dwivedi & An Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 06-03-2020.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Child Custody
See all petitions in Fundamental Rights
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
See all petitions in Judgment by Deepak Gupta
See all petitions in Judgment by Aniruddha Bose
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Modified
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2020
See all petitions in 2020 judgments

See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category