The Delhi High Court has declined to treat a husband's dissatisfaction with his meeting with his child as contempt of court, observing that a child cannot be forced to participate in a meeting and that a parent-child bond must be developed with care.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna disposing of a contempt petition filed by a husband against his wife over the alleged non-compliance with a Family Court order arranging their child's visit.
Background
In Ishu Shorey v. Megha Verma, the husband approached the High Court under Sections 2(b), 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.
The dispute arose from a Family Court order dated September 7, 2026. Under that order, the wife was required to bring the child to the Children Meeting Room at Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, at around noon on September 10. The husband was to collect the child and return the child to the wife at approximately 5 PM on the same day.
The husband alleged that although the wife brought the child, she obstructed him from taking the child and insisted that the celebration take place within the court premises. He further submitted that the Family Court had attempted to counsel the wife and the child, but the meeting could not take place effectively.
The High Court found no wilful disobedience of the Family Court's order, noting that the wife had produced the child as directed. The Court emphasised that a child's emotional needs and the development of a relationship with a parent cannot be addressed through compulsion.
The Court observed:
"The Child is not a commodity who can be compelled and forced to have effective meeting; it is a Child who needs to be nurtured and with whom a bonding has to be developed by the Petitioner, to be able to have effective meeting. Merely because the meeting was not to the satisfaction of the Petitioner, he cannot claim that there is a contempt by the Respondent."
The High Court disposed of the contempt petition and granted the husband liberty to approach the Principal Family Judge.
The Principal Family Judge may counsel both parties and ensure that effective meetings take place in accordance with the existing court orders.
