Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The petitioner is seeking right of physical interview in terms of Delhi Prison Rules and must therefore, exercise it in accordance thereof. He cannot, on one hand, seek right to physical interview according to Rule 589 DPR and on the other hand, not abide by the conditions contained therein.
The timing, duration, and whether oversight of a child counsellor is required during visitation by a non-custodial parent, is a call that the Court has to take bearing in mind, the best interest of the child.
“While considering the claim for custody of a minor child, unless very serious, proven conduct should make one of them unworthy to claim for custody of the child concerned, the question can and shall be decided solely by looking into the question as to, ‘what would be the best interest of the child concerned.”
Madras High Court closed the Habeas Corpus Petition with a liberty to the petitioner to visit her minor child at the house of the respondent 5, once a week
“The writ of habeas corpus is a prerogative writ, an extraordinary remedy, evolved under the common law and incorporated in our constitutional law, having the objective to protect and safeguard individual liberty.”
“While fair and temperate criticism of the Court, may not be actionable, but attributing improper motives or tending to bring Judges or Courts into hatred and contempt or obstructing directly or indirectly with the functioning of Courts is serious contempt of which notice will be taken.”
Madras High Court pointed out that at this juncture that the minor child had been under the grandparents’ care since birth, which was disturbed due to the strained relationship between the parties.
“If the children’s room remain open, a party to a litigation can have the benefit of visitation on Sundays and second Saturdays as well.”
Supreme Court viewed that the child being aged 12 years and 9 months old, was in a position to take decisions.
“Since the age of two years, the son has been in the exclusive custody of his mother and has had minimal interaction with his father. Now, when he is 16 years of age and has expressed his independent preference of continuing in his mother’s custody.”
“The Family Court is not to act as an adjudicatory forum alone but is also to act as a facilitator to secure settlement of disputes. The Family Court ought to adopt a different approach from that adopted in ordinary civil proceedings.”
The Karnataka High Court held that order granting visitation rights to the father is outside the jurisdictional scope of Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights.
Technology has advanced so much that regular interactions between two individuals living in different countries or even continents can easily be maintained through video calls and video conferencing. In fact, in the last three years, when the world was grappling with the Covid pandemic, interactions through video calls have become the new norm. Even when Courts today are functioning fully physically, lawyers are being permitted to join through video conferencing only because of the advancements in technology.
Telangana High Court: While deciding a case, wherein, a writ of habeas corpus was filed seeking to direct the respondents
Karnataka High Court: In a case filed by the petitioner-mother (‘petitioner 2') seeking acceptance on her pending passport application for
Bombay High Court: Anuja Prabhudessai, J., expressed that the children also have the right to love and affection from both parents as
Delhi High Court: Upholding the rights of the putative father, V. Kameswar Rao, J., expressed that while determining and granting such rights,
Chhattisgarh High Court: In a child custody battle, the Division Bench of Goutam Bhaduri and Rajani Dubey, JJ., reiterated the position of
Delhi High Court: Yashwant Varma, J., delved into the subject of the role of a Family Judge while deciding petitions which come
Allahabad High Court: J.J., Munir, J., addressed a matter wherein the father of the minor children has been facing trial for criminal charges