The paramount principle in family law is the welfare of the child, necessitating structured supervision in visitation rights amidst allegations of emotional distress and tutoring by a parent.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 05th April, 2022 whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, South East District, Saket Court, New Delhi has declined to review the order dated 02nd March, 2022. As per the order dated 02.03.2022, learned Judge, Family court on an application moved by respondent father inter alia ordered that the petitioner-mother shall bring child to the children room at Family Court, Saket on every first and third Saturday where the respondent-father will meet the child from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. till the next date of hearing.

2. It is pertinent to mention here that 02nd March, 2022 was a Wednesday, however, immediately thereafter on 04th March, 2022, an application was moved by the petitioner-mother for review of order dated 02nd March, 2022. Learned Principal Judge, Family Court understanding the gravity of the situation listed the matter for 08th March, 2022. It is an admitted case that on 05th March, 2022 i.e. first Saturday after the order, the child was brought to the Children Room, however, on that day, as per the petitioner-mother, the child started crying and did not want to meet his father.

3. Mr.Hitesh Arora, respondent-father, who is present in court, has stated before this court that on 05th March, 2022, initially the child was fine and was talking to him but suddenly after being tutored by the petitioner-mother, the child started crying. Respondent-father further states that, in fact, the child started crying and became inconsolable only because of having been tutored and pressurized by the petitioner-mother.

4. While the matter was still pending, the order dated 02nd March, 2022 was challenged by the petitioner-mother before this Court in CM (M) 239/2022 which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 16th March, 2022 as under:

"The challenge made in the present petition is to the orders of 2 and 8 March 2022 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, South East District, Saket. In terms of those orders, the Principal Judge has accorded visitation right to the respondent. By the order of 8 March 2022, the Court has refused to place the aforesaid order in abeyance. According to learned counsel when the father met the child on 5 March 2022 for interaction as permitted, an unsavoury incident occurred in the Children's Room and it is this which would warrant the order impugned being modified.

The Court however notes that till date the petitioner has failed to bring those facts pertaining to the incident that is stated to have occurred to the notice of the concerned Family Judge. It was clearly obligatory on the part of the petitioner to bring those facts to the notice of the Family Judge in the first instance enabling the Family Judge to firstly consider whether the order passed merited modification. In view of the aforesaid, the Court finds no ground to interfere with the order impugned.

The writ petition fails and shall stand dismissed. However this order shall not preclude the petitioner from approaching the concerned Family Judge for further directions/modifications as may be chosen and advised."

5. The matter was again taken up on 02nd April, 2022 and learned Principal Judge, Family Court interacted with the child alone in her chamber for 20 minutes. The learned Principal Judge, Family Court passed the following order:

"HMA No.821/19

Sonia Arora Vs. Hitesh Arora

02.04.2022

Matter is taken up physically as well as through video conferencing via Webex meet.

Present: Petitioner with Counsel Sh. Akil Sharma have appeared physically.

Respondent with Counsel Sh. Asim Nayyar have appeared physically.

Petitioner has brought the child "kiaan" in the court. I have talked to both