Back
Shadows in the Hall: When Custody Battles Turn into Courtroom Intimidation
The sanctity of the courtroom, intended as a neutral ground for the resolution of disputes, was breached in a startling manner during a hearing at the . In the ongoing battle between Sreedhanya Bhaskaran and Balakrishnan V.S., the judiciary’s attempt to prioritize the welfare of a six-year-old child was undermined by an act of unauthorized interference that has prompted a stern response from the bench.
The Backdrop: A Tug-of-War for Custody The case concerns a that has repeatedly brought a young child into the legal spotlight. Following failed attempts at compliance with earlier , the had been actively managing visitation and custody arrangements. The bench, comprised of Justice J. Nisha Banu and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen, had previously exempted the father from personal appearance on , specifically to allow the court to conduct an independent, stress-free interaction with the minor child.
However, the courtroom atmosphere shifted when an unidentified male lawyer approached the child—who was sitting in the back row with his mother—and allegedly whispered that his father was waiting for him downstairs.
A Child’s Trauma, A Court’s Displeasure The impact of this interaction was immediate and visible. The child, who had arrived at the court energetic and cheerful, became visibly distressed. When brought into the judges' chambers shortly after for a planned private interaction, he refused to move from his mother’s side, clutching her hand in evident fear.
The court, upon learning of the encounter and verifying it through courtroom video and corridor CCTV footage, expressed profound indignation. The Bench noted that the lawyer’s actions were not only an unauthorized breach of protocol but a calculated move to inject instability into the child’s emotional state.
Key Observations from the Bench The High Court’s order underscores the heavy burden placed upon legal professionals. As the Bench aptly stated:
-
"The lawyer, who unauthorisedly approached the child in the court hall and showed the courage to convey the message to the child about the arrival of the father, has done great injustice to the court as well as to the minor child."
-
"A lawyer’s duty extends beyond the client to the court, to the administration of justice and to the society at large."
-
"As an officer of the court and a guardian of the
, a lawyer must uphold the
, assist in the dispensation of justice and ensure that legal expertise is not employed to perpetuate illegality or injustice."
-
"The profession demands a commitment to the public good. But for the said incident, the child would have remained comfortable, and we could have interacted with him to arrive at a proper conclusion."
Strengthening the Child’s Best Interests By prioritizing the child's psychological well-being over strict adherence to the previous visitation schedule, the Court granted to the mother, noting that the child was visibly distressed and required stability.
To ensure accountability, the Registry has been directed to save all video records and collaborate with the and the to identify the lawyer involved in the incident. Furthermore, the court has appointed the Child Support Lawyer (CSL) under the to act as a bridge for future interactions, ensuring the child’s voice is heard without the risk of external manipulation.
Looking Ahead The matter is set to return to the bench on . Both parents have expressed a willingness to settle the dispute through the , with Senior Mediator appointed to facilitate the process.
This regrettable episode serves as a powerful reminder: the has no place when a child’s emotional security is at stake, and those tasked with upholding the law are held to a standard that transcends the interests of their individual clients.
