Courts Can Scar Children<\/em>: In an order dated 24 February 2026<\/strong>, the Madhya Pradesh High Court<\/strong> at Jabalpur, comprising Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal<\/strong>, decided a case involving a father\u2019s right to meet his minor son<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The appeal was filed after the Family Court refused to change an earlier order related to the father\u2019s visitation rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Earlier, the Family Court had allowed the father to meet his son only inside the court premises<\/strong> on the second and fourth Saturdays from 3:00 PM to 5:00 PM<\/strong>, and the meeting had to take place in the presence of the mother.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n However, during some of these meetings, arguments and unpleasant incidents reportedly took place between the parents<\/strong>. Because of this situation, the High Court reconsidered whether the court premises was the right place for a child to meet a parent.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The High Court observed that forcing children to come to court repeatedly is not healthy<\/strong> for them. The judges clearly stated that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Courts should be the last resort for a child to visit because courts are often seen as intimidating, sterile, and stressful environments that can ‘scar’ a child emotionally.”<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The Court further explained that visitation should happen in a “child-friendly” environment<\/strong>, suggesting places such as “Malls, parks, or reputable play zones.”<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court also referred to the Supreme Court decision in Vivek Kumar Chaturvedi & Anr Vs. State of U.P. & Ors (2025 INSC 159)<\/em><\/strong> and highlighted that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n “For older children (e.g., 7th standard), the court must elicit the child’s attitude in a comfortable setting rather than forcing the child’s presence in a hostile environment.”<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Taking these factors into consideration, the High Court modified the visitation arrangement<\/strong>. The father is now allowed to meet his son on the second and fourth Sunday of every month from 11:00 AM to 5:00 PM in public places<\/strong> instead of the court premises. The father must inform the mother in advance about the meeting\u2019s date, time, and location<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court also allowed the father to give his son clothes, sweets, gifts, chocolates, and toys<\/strong> during these meetings. In addition, the Court granted a special permission<\/strong> for the upcoming Eid festival<\/strong>, allowing the father to take the child to his house for three hours<\/strong> so that the child can meet his grandfather and other relatives<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With these directions, the High Court disposed of the appeal and emphasized that the child\u2019s emotional comfort and welfare must always remain the priority in visitation matters.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
Explanatory Table: Laws And Provisions Involved<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Law \/ Provision<\/strong><\/td> Purpose<\/strong><\/td> How Applied in This Case<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/thead> Guardians and Wards Act, 1890<\/a> \u2013 Section 7<\/strong><\/td> Court can regulate guardianship and access of minors.<\/td> Basis for court\u2019s power over custody and visitation.<\/td><\/tr> Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 \u2013 Section 17<\/strong><\/td> Welfare of the child<\/a> is the main consideration.<\/td> Court focused on child\u2019s emotional comfort.<\/td><\/tr> Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 \u2013 Section 25<\/strong><\/td> Court can regulate custody and access of a minor.<\/td> Used to modify the father\u2019s visitation rights.<\/td><\/tr> Family Courts Act, 1984<\/a> \u2013 Section 7<\/strong><\/td> Gives Family Courts jurisdiction over custody matters.<\/td> Family Court originally passed the visitation order.<\/td><\/tr> Family Courts Act, 1984 \u2013 Section 9<\/strong><\/td> Encourages settlement in family disputes.<\/td> Court aimed for a workable and less hostile arrangement.<\/td><\/tr> Article 227 of the Constitution of India<\/a><\/strong><\/td> High Court supervises subordinate courts.<\/td> High Court reviewed the Family Court\u2019s order.<\/td><\/tr> Child Welfare Principle<\/strong><\/td> Child\u2019s best interest is paramount.<\/td> Visitation moved to child-friendly places.<\/td><\/tr> Vivek Kumar Chaturvedi & Anr vs State of U.P. & Ors (2025 INSC 159)<\/strong><\/td> Child\u2019s views should be taken in a comfortable environment.<\/td> Court relied on this principle to avoid court meetings.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n Case Details<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Key Takeaways<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n