Matrimonial Cases Are The Most Bitterly Fought Adversarial Litigation In India: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has recently observed that divorce disputes are the most bitterly fought adversarial litigation, with estranged couples treating their children as chattel or property.

The statement was made by a bench of Justices RD Dhanuka and Gauri Godse while hearing a petition filed by a man seeking visitation privileges to meet his 15-year-old son. The boy lives in Thailand with his mother.

The court has now ordered the man’s wife to return to India with the couple’s son.

“This is an unfortunate case in which the children have suffered as a result of the parents’ bitterly fought matrimonial dispute. Matrimonial disputes are the most bitterly fought adversarial litigation in our country. When bickering couples quit seeing reason, they reach a tipping point. The children are treated as chattel,” the bench stated in its order.

The bench elaborated on the function of the courts in such circumstances, saying, “The role of the court becomes crucial. The court must exercise parents patriae jurisdiction and order the parties to act in the best interests of the children.”

The bench noted that in this situation, the boy did not want to see his father because of his previous experiences, but he did want to meet his siblings. The bench stated that he should be treated as an individual and that his opinions should be respected.

The father has custody of the couple’s older children, a son and a daughter (both adults), while the mother has custody of the 15-year-old. The father had approached the court, stating that in September 2020, the family court ordered his estranged wife to provide him unrestricted access to their son, the boy’s elder siblings, and grandparents.

The father asked the court to order his wife to bring their son to India during the summer vacation. The woman stated that she was willing to travel to India with her kid, but that a directive be issued to ensure that she and her son can safely return to Thailand at the end of their vacation.

The bench stated that a just and proper balance must be struck between the needs of the parents and the welfare of the kid. The judges also stated that if the boy’s thoughts and opinions were not given sufficient consideration, it could be damaging to his future.

According to the judge, the son was denied the company of his father and older siblings due to the divorce dispute.

“It is necessary for a child’s growth that he has the company of both his parents as well as his siblings,” the court stated, adding that both parents should express regret and take corrective measures immediately.

According to the court, the parents should prioritize the child’s wellbeing and provide him with a safe and pleasant environment in which to interact with his entire family.

The bench ordered the woman to accompany her kid to India so that he might meet his father and siblings, and stated that the father would not file a complaint or take any action for the arrest or imprisonment of the mother and her son during this period.

It further ordered the state and central agencies involved to guarantee that the mother and her kid are not hampered in any way and that no impediment to their safe return to Thailand is established.