Can a Child Meet Both Parents Through a Court-Structured Visitation Schedule?

Introduction

Every custody order answers a practical question: how will the child spend time with each parent? A separated child still needs both parents, but someone has to turn that need into a timetable. In India that task falls to the court, which fixes when the child will be with the parent who does not have custody. The question, then, is whether such a schedule can genuinely let a child meet both parents. This article argues that it can: courts accept the principle and can draft workable schedules, but success depends on the detail of the order and on compliance with it. It examines the legal basis, the child’s right to both parents, what makes a schedule workable and why schedules fail.

The Legal Basis

The starting point is welfare. Under Section 17 of the Guardians and Wards Act of 1890, the court must act in the interest of welfare, considering factors such as the age of the minor, the character and capability of the proposed guardian and, where the child is old enough, the child’s preference. Under Section 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act of 1956, the welfare of the child is the paramount consideration, and the section denies anyone guardianship under the Act if it would not benefit the child. There is no mention of visitation rights. Courts have therefore developed it as part of their general power to make custody orders, and the schedule itself is left to their discretion.

The Child's Right to Both Parents

The right to meet both parents belongs to the child, not to either parent. If welfare is the test, contact with both parents is something the child is owed, not something one parent concedes to the other. The Supreme Court made this point in Roxann Sharma v. Arun Sharma (2015) 8 SCC 318, saying that a child is not a chattel to be passed between parents and that custody

Can a Child Meet Both Parents Through a Court-Structured Visitation Schedule?

disputes turn on welfare, not parental rights. Regular contact with both parents also gives the child stability and reduces the risk of being drawn into a loyalty contest.

Distance changes how a child meets a parent, not whether the child is entitled to do so. In Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan (2020) 3 SCC 67, the Supreme Court recognised the child’s right to both parents and directed video contact, treating it as real contact. This carries the principle from the school holiday to the daily call. Once contact is accepted as the child’s right, the question becomes how to structure it so that it works.

What a Workable Schedule Contains

A visitation schedule works when it replaces a vague promise of access with fixed days, times and fall-back arrangements. In Vivek Singh v. Romani Singh (2017) 3 SCC 231, the Delhi High Court gave the father the child from 5.30 p.m. on every fourth Friday to 6.00 p.m. on Sunday, fifteen days in the summer vacation, four days in winter and four hours on her birthday. Dates were to be agreed by the parties, failing which the Family Court would fix them. The weekend format suited a father living in another city, showing that a schedule should follow the family’s actual circumstances.

Visitation is not custody, which is why precision in the timetable matters. In Roxann Sharma v. Arun Sharma (2015) 8 SCC 318, the Supreme Court explained that visitation lets a parent meet the child without removing the child from the other parent’s custody, but if the child spends hours or days away, temporary custody effectively moves. It therefore fixed the father’s visits at 2.30 to 6.00 pm on Tuesdays and Thursdays and 2.30 to 9.00 pm on Saturdays, as a temporary arrangement. A clearly bounded schedule protects both the visiting parent’s contact and the custodial parent’s authority.

A workable schedule is one that anticipates the points on which parents are most likely to disagree. The child’s age matters: a young child’s wishes carry little weight, whereas an older child can be heard through a counsellor, as in Vivek Singh. Distance decides whether contact falls on weekdays or weekends. Fixed handover times and places remove arguments about who delivers the child, and holidays and special days need separate terms. A fall-back for setting dates stops one parent from blocking contact by refusing to agree. Most importantly, the schedule should be open to review, as in Vivek Singh, where the Court revisited the arrangement after a year and let either side seek changes. Yet even a well-drafted schedule depends on both parents following it.

Why Schedules Fail

The main threat to a visitation order is delay, because time changes the facts on which welfare is judged. Each year of non-compliance strengthens the bond between the child and the parent who has her, so the court ends up deciding a different case from the one it started with. In Vivek Singh, the father did not hand over the child as ordered, and the mother began contempt proceedings, which the Supreme Court stayed. By the time of the appeal the child was eight and told the counsellor she wished to stay with her father. The Court observed that her preference had been shaped by the years she lived only with him, and it discussed parental alienation, where a child is drawn into a loyalty contest and shown one parent in a wholly negative light. A child’s wishes are only as reliable as the conditions in which they were formed, which is why an unenforced order harms the child as well as the other parent.

The law gives courts no framework specific to enforcing visitation orders, so they rely on contempt, conditions and their own supervision. In Roxann Sharma, the father left the court’s jurisdiction with the child without permission, and the Court, which took this seriously, deposited both parents’ passports with the court. Such safeguards are improvised case by case, which makes enforcement slow and dependent on the judge. The weakness lies less in the principle than in the machinery for enforcing it.

Conclusion

Yes, a child can meet both parents through a court-structured schedule, because Indian courts treat that contact as part of welfare. A schedule works when it is specific about days, handovers, holidays, a fall-back for dates and a review. Yet there is no framework specific to drafting or enforcing visitation orders, so success depends on the judge and on the parents’ compliance. Model parenting-plan guidelines for courts would set out the elements of a schedule, so that detail does not depend on the individual judge. Counsellor-assisted mediation before an order is made would be better still, since parents who agree on the terms are more likely to follow them. A quick, clear process for enforcing breaches would stop delays from changing the facts.

FAQs

1. Can a child meet both parents through a court-ordered visitation schedule in India?

Answer: Yes. Indian courts can establish visitation schedules that allow a child to maintain contact with both parents after separation or divorce. The arrangements may specify visiting days, timings, holidays, handovers and virtual contact, depending on the child's welfare and the circumstances of the family.

2. What laws govern child visitation rights in India?

Answer: The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, provides a general legal framework for custody and guardianship matters. Section 17 requires courts to consider the child's welfare when deciding guardianship questions. For Hindus, Section 13 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, also establishes the paramount importance of the minor's welfare. Courts determine visitation arrangements through their jurisdiction in custody proceedings and relevant judicial principles.

3. What is the difference between child custody and visitation rights?

Answer: Child custody concerns the care and responsibility for a child, while visitation generally allows a parent who does not have custody to spend time with the child. Visitation may involve in-person meetings, overnight stays, school holidays or video calls. The precise arrangement depends on the court's order and the child's best interests.

4. What factors do courts consider when deciding a child visitation schedule?

Answer: Courts may consider the child's age, emotional needs, education, health, relationship with each parent, the distance between the parents' homes and the child's preferences where appropriate. They may also consider safety concerns, the parents' conduct and the practical arrangements needed to ensure consistent contact.

5. Can a court order video calls between a child and a parent living in another city or country?

Answer: Yes. Courts may direct video calls or other forms of virtual communication to maintain the relationship between a child and a parent who lives far away. In Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan (2020), the Supreme Court emphasised the importance of a child's relationship with both parents and recognised virtual contact as a means of maintaining that connection.

6. What did the Supreme Court say about visitation in Roxann Sharma v. Arun Sharma?

Answer: In Roxann Sharma v. Arun Sharma (2015), the Supreme Court emphasised that custody disputes must be decided according to the child's welfare. The judgment also addressed the distinction between visitation and custody and made a specific temporary visitation arrangement. It illustrates why court orders should define the timing and limits of visits clearly.

7. Can a parent refuse to comply with a court-ordered visitation schedule?

Answer: A parent should not unilaterally disregard a valid visitation order. If compliance becomes difficult or circumstances change, the appropriate course is to seek modification or clarification from the court. Depending on the facts and applicable procedure, deliberate non-compliance may lead to enforcement proceedings or other judicial consequences.

8. What happens if one parent repeatedly prevents the other parent from meeting the child?

Answer: The affected parent may approach the court that passed the visitation order and seek appropriate enforcement or other relief. The court may examine the reasons for non-compliance, its effect on the child and whether changes or additional safeguards are necessary. Persistent obstruction may become relevant to later custody or visitation decisions.

9. Can a child express a preference about whom they want to live with or visit?

Answer: Yes. Courts may consider a child's views where the child is sufficiently mature to express an independent and considered preference. The child's wishes are one factor in the overall welfare assessment and are not automatically decisive. Courts may use counsellors or other appropriate methods to understand the child's views.

10. Can a court change an existing child visitation schedule?

Answer: Yes. A court may modify a visitation arrangement when there is a material change in circumstances or when modification is necessary for the child's welfare. Changes in the child's age, school schedule, health, travel distance or family circumstances may justify reconsideration. Parents should seek a formal variation rather than unilaterally changing an existing court order.

© 2025. All rights reserved.