Delhi High Court Says Parent Cannot Be Denied Time With Children Merely Because They Are Abroad

A Division Bench of Justice Tejas Karia and Justice Madhu Jain allowed an appeal filed by businessman Amritesh Jatia and granted him interim custody of his two minor children in London from June 28 to July 5, 2026, during the children's summer vacation with their mother.

Senior Advocate Geeta Luthra along with Advocates Aadarsh Kothari and Aparna Bhadoria appeared for the petitioner husband.

The case arose from an order of the Family Court dismissing Jatia's application under Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking interim custody of the children in London. The Family Court had reasoned that the father could instead spend time with the children in India before they departed for the United Kingdom.

The High Court, however, found this reasoning unsustainable.

"The reasoning adopted by the learned Family Court, namely that the Appellant may spend time with the children only in India and not in London, is unsupported by any material on record," the Bench observed. It noted that the children had lived in London with both parents from 2015 to 2019 and were familiar with the city.

Flight Risk Apprehension Rejected

Advocates Manali Singhal, Shreya Singhal and Aanchal Kapoor appearing for the mother opposed the plea, contending that the father might abscond with the children and settle abroad. She alleged that he had sold his shareholding in a hotel company, received over ₹110 crore outside India and had offshore financial arrangements, raising concerns that he may relocate to Mauritius with the children.

The High Court rejected these apprehensions as speculative.

"If the Appellant intended to permanently remove the children from India, such apprehension would equally arise even when the children are with him during a vacation in India," the Court said. It added that the children's passports remained in the mother's custody and observed that it was "highly unlikely" that duplicate passports could be procured in London without her knowledge or consent.

Children's Welfare at the Centre

The mother also argued that the father should not be permitted to spend time with the children in London because he had not borne the expenses of their travel and because her parents had paid for the trip. She further claimed that he had never travelled alone with the children and was incapable of taking care of them by himself.

The Court found little merit in these objections. It noted that the mother had no objection to the father spending time with the children in India.

"If the Appellant can take care of the children in India, there is no reason why he cannot do so while in London as well," the Bench observed.

Public Significance of the Judgment

The judgment reiterates an important principle in child custody disputes: access and parenting rights should be determined by the welfare of the children and not by geographical considerations or speculative fears. The Court recognised that children benefit from maintaining meaningful relationships with both parents, even when matrimonial disputes are pending.

To balance the competing concerns, the High Court imposed safeguards. It directed the father to reimburse the full cost of the children's return air tickets before June 25, failing which he would lose the benefit of interim custody. The children's passports will remain with the mother, and the father has been specifically restrained from taking the children outside London during the custody period. 

"The Respondent shall hand over custody of the children to the Appellant at 9:00 AM on 28.06.2026, at a place in London to be decided by the Respondent and communicated to the Appellant by 5:00 PM on 27.06.2026. The Appellant shall hand over custody of the children back to the Respondent at 5:00 PM on 05.07.2026, at a place in London to be decided by the Respondent and communicated to the Appellant by 5:00 PM on 04.07.2026," the Court ordered.

Accordingly, the Court set aside the Family Court's order and granted the father custody of the children in London for one week during their summer break.