A Parent Should Not Be Denied Visitation Rights Except In Extreme Circumstances: Orissa High Court
The Court said that cogent reasons must be assigned while refusing visitation right of either of the spouses to their child.
The Orissa High Court, while upholding the trial court order granted visitation right to the father, observed that a parent should not be denied permission to contact or visit his/her child except in extreme circumstances with cogent reasons.
The Petitioner-wife challenges the visitation right on the ground that she has not been paid with maintenance and thereby, visitation right should not have been granted to the husband.
Justice G. Satapathy stated, "Excepting the extreme circumstance, one parent should not be denied to contact or visit his/her child and the cogent reasons must be assigned while refusing visitation right of either of the spouses to their child.”
Furthermore, The Court noted that "the child should not be denied with proper care and affection, merely because his/her parents are at war with each other. The child is not an inanimate object which can be tossed from one parent to other."
Senior Advocate B.Bhuyan appeared for the petitioner, while Advocate L. K. Moharana appeared for the respondent.
Facts of The Case
Petitioner-wife has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India by praying to quash the order which the trial court has allowed granting visitation right to the Opposite Party-father. Along with that, she challenges the impugned order granting visitation right of the son to the father on the ground that the husband has not paid the interim maintenance so also the litigation expenses to her and the minor child was deserted by the husband when he was hardly one month old and the minor child is in her custody had already grown up and the father had never visited the son nor had taken care of the child or made arrangement for his survival.
Court Reasoning
“Upon a holistic consideration of facts and circumstance as presented in this case and the paramount consideration being the welfare of the minor child and prioritizing the child’s need for love &affection from his parents and there being no tangible material or extreme circumstances to refuse the father from his legitimate right to visit his son, this Court considers that the learned trial court has rightly granted visitation right of the child to the father-necessitating no interference by this Court in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction.” Court noted.
Cause Title: Manjusha Singhania v. Nimish Singhania [W.P.(C) No.28784 of 2019]
Appearance
Petitioner Senior Advocate B.Bhuyan and Advocate S. Sahoo.
Respondent Advocate L. K. Moharana
