“Undoubtedly in case there is necessity for such psychological assessment and evaluation, Court is bound to do so. However, in the case on hand this Court does not find any such necessity to order the children to subject themselves for psychological assessment and evaluation that too to know the impact of parental alienation,” Justice Chillakur Sumalatha said while rejecting the father's plea.

The Court observed that in their fight over the guardianship and custody of the children, the parents were subjecting the children to serious hardship.

“The children of 5-6 years generally tend to spend their time playing, engaging themselves with other children, learning and getting themselves involved in various activities of their choice. But this case reveals sad state of affairs where the parents claiming themselves to be the best protectors of children, are subjecting the children to unwarranted hardship,” the Court said.

In the present case, the petitioner alleged that the respondent-mother had been “poisoning” the minds of children, aged around five years, against him, by telling them that ghosts stat at his house. The petitioner produced the voice recordings between him and the children during the visitation sessions to substantiate his arguments.

The Court, however, found that there was no necessity for the father to record his conversations with the children.

“As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for respondent there is no necessity for the petitioner/father to record the conversation. The conversation recorded produced by petitioner/father himself reveals the effort and intention of the father to get answers which will ultimately help him in projecting his own version. In case petitioner/father wanted to record the conversation, he should have obtained prior permission from the Court. But he has not done so,” the Court observed.

Commenting on the reliability of the children's statements, the Court said, “That apart children of tender years will speak something either to please the elders or something which comes to their mind or to get relieved from the conversation by stating something. Even for recording the evidence of the children below the age of 12 years, certain procedure is contemplated by the Courts of law.”

The Court further noted that the father was regularly exercising his visitation rights and, therefore, nothing prevented him from developing a bond with the children during such visits.

“As petitioner/father is exercising his visitation rights regularly, nothing prevents him to develop bondage with the children during the time spent with them. It is not the case of petitioner/father that his visitation is deprived,” it said.

The High Court held that there was no necessity to subject the children to clinical evaluation. Instead, the Court ordered the parents to undergo psychological assessment.

“Having considered the manner in which petitioner/father and respondent/mother are conducting themselves as parents of tender aged children, this Court is of the view that they need assistance of good psychologist so as to enlighten them about their responsibility to behave as responsible parents. If such assistance is not given to the parties of these proceedings, this Court is of the view that the children who ultimately will be brought up by them will suffer with psychological disorders/imbalance which will not be conducive either for their mental health or for the society at large,” the Court directed.

Case: S vs N

WRIT PETITION NO. 15549 OF 2026 (GM-FC)

Click Here To Read/Download Order