Access of child during vacation - Court finds conditions imposed by one parent deemed unreasonable and impractical.

Bombay High Court Upholds Father's Rights for Diwali Custody Amidst Parental Dispute, Court dismisses mother's petition, deems condition for grandmother's absence during child’s stay as unreasonable

In a significant judgment delivered on October 22, 2025, the Bombay High Court, presided over by Justice Amit S. Jamsandekar, upheld a Family Court order granting a father, Chirag S. Devrukhakar, access to his 7-year-old son for ten days during the Diwali vacation. The decision came after the child's mother, Chinmai Ravindra Devrukhkar, challenged the Family Court's order, imposing a condition that the child's paternal grandmother should not be present during the child's stay.

The petitioner, represented by advocate Mr. Kunal Tiwari, argued that the existing consent terms and the child's young age rendered the extended stay with the father inappropriate. Mr. Tiwari cited various Supreme Court judgments to support the claim that the Family Court had not adequately considered the child’s best interests.

However, the respondent, appearing in person, countered that the mother's condition was unreasonable and impractical, as it demanded his mother vacate the house during the son's visit. Highlighting a breach in the order, he noted that the petitioner had already denied access to the child, contrary to the Family Court's directive.

The High Court, examining the Counsellor's report and the Family Court's detailed order, found the mother's condition unwarranted. Justice Jamsandekar observed that the Family Court had duly considered the child's wishes and circumstances, supported by the Counsellor's findings. The report indicated that while the mother was willing to allow the child to stay with the father, her objection to the grandmother's presence was the only contention.

Justice Jamsandekar concluded that the judgments cited by the petitioner were inapplicable to the present case's specific facts and circumstances. The court emphasized the unreasonable nature of the petitioner's condition and affirmed the Family Court's decision to grant the father interim custody for the specified period.

The High Court dismissed the petition, reinforcing the Family Court's order, and underscored the importance of equitable and practical considerations in custody matters. The decision highlights the judiciary's commitment to balancing parental rights and the child's welfare, ensuring decisions are grounded in practical realities rather than arbitrary conditions.

Bottom Line:

Family Law - Access of child during vacation - Conditions imposed by one parent deemed unreasonable and impractical.

Statutory provision(s): Family Law, Access to Child, Interim Custody, Child’s Welfare, Court Procedures

Chinmai Ravindra Devrukhkar v. Chirag S. Devrukhakar, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2799069