The court declined to modify interim visitation rights because the appellant failed to utilize the existing court-ordered visitation opportunities, thereby negating any claim of urgent necessity for judicial intervention.

1. The present Appeal has been filed by the Appellant under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, for the modification of the Order dated 19th December, 2025, passed by the ld. Family Court in Guardianship Petition (G.P.) No. 29/2019, whereby the ld. Family Court disposed of the G.P with the following directions:

“11. In view of overall facts and circumstances and submissions made and also in view of the material on record, the following arrangement is hereby made regarding interim custody/visitation rights regarding subject child:-

The petitioner/father shall be having the visitation rights on 28.12.2025 (Sunday), 31.12.2025 (New Year's eve), 02.01.2026 (Friday) and 07.01.2026 (Wednesday). The said visitation shall be at the venue "Pacific Mall, Subhash Nagar, Delhi" which is nearer to the place of respondent, keeping in view the comfort of the subject child. The visitation/meeting time are from 12:00 noon to 03:00 p.m. on each of the above dates. The petitioner shall be having the duty to pick-up and drop the child from the place of respondent. Travelling time is excluded from meeting hours at the venue. The said time slot has been fixed keeping in view the fact that it is winter season and there is early sunset. Both the parties are directed to take every care so that no inconvenience or discomfort is caused to the child. Parties shall also ensure that no annoyance or inconvenience is caused to the public persons available near the venue. The respondent is at liberty to be present near the venue but not in the sight of the child. Respondent is directed to cooperate with the petitioner and the child so that no interference/inconvenience is caused in the meeting. The petitioner shall allow the subject child to have video calls with respondent for at least one or two times during the said meeting hours.”

2. The ld. Counsel for the Appellant has stated that the visitations are supervised visitations provided by the ld. Family Court, whereas previously the Appellant was given overnight visitation with the child on the previous occasions by the Order dated 11th December, 2024, of this Court. This submission has been vehemently denied by the ld. Counsel for the Respondent, stating that the ld. Counsel for the Appellant is relying on the Order dated 11th December, 2024, passed by the High Court of Delhi in W. P. (CRL.) No. 2808/2024 titled “Vishal Verma Vs. State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors.”, and that the same has already been overruled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. No. 18175/2024 titled “Twinkle Vinayak v. Vishal Verma & Ors.”, vide Order dated 12th August, 2025.

3. It is also submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Respondent that the Appellant has not availed his visitation rights as of 28th December, 2025 and 31st December, 2025, without there being any specified reasons, to which the ld. Counsel for the Appellant has stated that the Appellant had not availed the visitation rights as he was aggrieved by the Order passed by the ld. Family Court on 19th December, 2025, and since he has already filed the Appeal and has given advance notice to the Respondent, he was not interested in availing the said opportunity unless the overnight visitation of the child was granted to the Appellant.

4. Considering the fact that the Appellant himself has not availed the opportunity of visitation of the minor child on 28th December 2025 and 31st December 2025, this Court is of the opinion that there is no urgency in modifying the present Impugned Order at this stage. Further, as regards the school’s winter vacation of the minor child, it is submitted that both the ld. Counsels agree that the vacation of the minor child is till 11th January 2026.

5. Therefore, the matter may be listed before the Roster Bench on 5th January 2026.