Willful disobedience of court-ordered child visitation, without valid emergent justification, constitutes civil contempt. Persistent failure to comply with such directions, despite judicial warnings and the use of routine medical excuses to circumvent these mandates, demonstrates an intentional disregard for the authority of the court.

JUDGMENT :

SACHIN DATTA, J.

1. Vide order dated 20.02.2026 passed in the present proceedings, it was directed as under:

“1. Vide order dated 12.11.2025 passed in the present proceedings it was, inter alia, recorded as under:

“5. Today, two minor children have been brought and this Court has interacted with them in the Chamber.

6. The older son is studying in Class V and the younger son is studying in Class I.

7. The children were comfortable being with the father. They expressed their feelings that both the parents should be together but at the same time they were not averse to be with the father-petitioner all by themselves.

8. Respondent, on the other hand, insists that it will be in the interest of the children that she will be present at the time of the visitation with the husband.

9. In the considered opinion of this Court, the direction passed by the learned Division Bench vide order dated 18.02.2025 was clear that the appellant, i.e., respondent herein, will drop the minor children at the official accommodation of the respondent, i.e., the petitioner herein, at 11:00 AM on every alternate Sunday, i.e., 1st and 3rd Sunday of the month, whereafter the respondent, i.e., the petitioner herein, will drop back the children to the resident of the appellant, i.e., the respondent herein, at 04:30 PM on the same day.

10. Clearly, in no uncertain terms, perusal of the order dated 18.02.2025 passed by learned Division Bench indicates that at the time of visitation the children would be with the petitioner all by themselves without the presence of the respondent.

11. It is further pointed out that the next date for visitation is scheduled for 16.11.2025.

12. It is agreed with the consent of the petitioner that only for the purpose of visitation on 16.11.2025, he will pick up the children from the residence of the respondent at 11:00 AM and will drop the children back at the residence of the respondent at 02:00 AM.

13. It is made clear that the respondent shall not accompany the petitioner and the children on 16.11.2025.

14. List for further hearing on 19.11.2025 at 04:30 PM.

15. The respondent shall bring both the children on the next date of hearing for further interaction.”

2. It is alleged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that despite the categorical and unmistakeable terms of the directions contained in aforesaid order, the same are not being complied with by the respondent, inasmuch as the respondent continues to remain present at the time of visitation afforded to the petitione.

3. The respondent, who is present in person, expresses apprehension about the availability of the adequate medical facilities that may arise during the visitation on account of medical condition of the younger son of the parties.

4. The petitioner, who has joined the proceedings virtually, assures and undertakes that appropriate arrangements shall be made to ensure that the adequate medical facilities are available in the event of need for the same during the visitation.

5. He also submits that he is an Army Personnel and in the vicinity of his residence, there are ample doctors residing and medical facilities are also available.

6. In the circumstances, the respondent is cautioned against disregarding the directions contained in the order dated 12.11.2025. In terms thereof, for the purpose of visitation, the child would remain present with the petitioner without presence of the respondent. It is made clear that any infringement or violation of the aforesaid directions shall be considered as wilful and egregious contempt of the orders passed by this Court, entailing severe actions.

7. List for further consideration on 30.07.2026.”

2. On account of the aforesai