Child's Sense Of Security Paramount; Parent's Visitation Right May Be Curtailed Without Deciding Disputed Allegations: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that while a parent is entitled to regular and meaningful visitation rights, the same can be regulated at the interim stage if circumstances indicate a risk to child's sense of security, emotional well-being or psychological stability, even without adjudicating disputed allegations between the parents.

A Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar observed,

“At the stage of determining interim visitation, the Court is not required to render definitive findings on disputed facts. What is required is an evaluation of whether the allegations and surrounding circumstances, taken cumulatively, raise concerns that may have an adverse impact on the child's welfare.”

It thus dismissed the appeal preferred by a father, challenging a Family Court order curtailing his interim visitation rights with the minor child.

The appellant had contended that the reduction in physical visitation amounted to parental alienation and was based on unproven allegations levelled against him, including claims relating to disconnection of electricity and tampering with CCTV cameras at the matrimonial residence.

The Respondent-wife on the other hand argued that their minor daughter was of school-going age and in her formative years, requiring stability, routine, and adequate time for academic engagement as well as co-curricular activities.

She argued that the earlier visitation arrangement required the child to attend multiple physical meetings during the week for limited durations, entailing repeated travel and disruption of daily schedule.

She submitted that the modification of visitation, by reducing the frequency of physical interaction while retaining avenues for regular contact, was better aligned with the child's overall welfare and developmental needs.

Agreeing, the High Court observed,

“While the Appellant-father's apprehension of parental alienation is noted, the modification of visitation in the present case is a protective measure, ensuring the child's well-being while preserving avenues for continued meaningful contact. Such an approach aligns with the established principle that the welfare of the child must prevail over all other considerations in matters of custody and visitation.”

The Court noted that an FIR dated January 29, 2025, along with allegations of ongoing disputes between the parents, reflected a situation of continuing discord which could have a bearing on the child's emotional and psychological well-being.

Upholding the Family Court's approach, the High Court emphasized that the impugned order did not terminate or unduly restrict parental contact, but merely restructured it.

As such, the Court declined to interfere in the matter and dismissed the appeal.

Case title: JC v. BS

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 65

Case no.: MAT.APP.(F.C.) 433/2025

Click here to read order