IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION  (C)  No. 5593 OF  2010  

Sumana Bhasin …Appellant

Versus

Neeraj Bhasin          ….Respondent

O R D E R

From meeting the persona dramatis  in  this  unfortunate and painful  

affair, i.e., the estranged spouses and their two children what we could see  

may be stated thus:

The spouses are living separately for the past three years and there  

appears to be little chances of their coming together. The husband was at  

least willing to talk about reconciliation but for the wife it was a closed issue  

and she was not  even prepared to consider  the possibility.  This  we state  

simply  as  a  fact  without  holding  the  wife  to  any  blame  for  taking  that  

position.

Their two sons, Pranav, aged fifteen years and Vishnu, aged seven  

years live with the mother.

The elder son, Pranav, aged fifteen years also appeared to be quite  

antagonistic towards the father. He was quite rebellious of him and did not  

show any enthusiasm for meeting the father or being taken out by him. In  

reply to a pointed question he said that he would meet his father no more  

than once in a month. On being further pressed he conceded two meetings in  

a month. We, however, got the impression that rather than meeting the father  

his object was to be the escort for the younger brother when he should be  

taken out by the father.

The father is fully aware of his elder son’s feelings towards him and  

he too does not seem to care much about the elder son.

But  the  position  is  quite  different  in  respect  of  the  younger  son,  

Vishnu. The father is quite fond of him and thinks that the younger one has  

taken after him.  In answer to a question by us he warmly described the time  

spent by them together when he last took out Vishnu.

We also talked to Vishnu. Only seven years old, he is still almost a  

babe. But by speaking to him we felt that he was not unduly ill disposed  

towards the father.  He seemed to be quite  comfortable and happy in the  

company of the father.

2

It seems to us that excepting Vishnu, who is still very small, all the  

three clearly understand how each one feels  about  the others.  It  is  noted  

above that the elder son Pranav, is not much interested in going out with the  

father for the sake of his company. But he consented to go along with the  

younger brother mainly with the view to see that the young one should not  

come under the father’s spell. The mother was more forthright. When it was  

pointed out to her that Vishnu did not appear unduly reluctant about going  

out with the father she said that he is very young and could be easily won  

over by the offer of material things fancied by small children. She was not  

happy at all to let Vishnu go out alone with the father. As to Pranav, she said  

that he was in class X and his studies did not leave him with much free time  

for anything else. The intent was clearly to limit the visitation right of the  

father; Vishnu should not be allowed to go alone with the father and Pranav  

was too busy with his studies to be asked to go with Vishnu each time he  

was taken out by the father.  

It may also be stated here that earlier the father was permitted to keep  

the sons overnight.  But  in view of some very serious allegations  leveled  

against him in a petition filed by the wife, the father’s visitation rights were  

curtailed and he was only allowed to take out the children during the day  

time. Then the elder child refused to go out with him. At this stage, the court  

3

directed that the father should be allowed atleast to take the younger one, if  

necessary by taking the help of police.

On a careful consideration of all the material facts and circumstances,  

we are of  the view, that  it  would be quite  unjust  to deny the father any  

meetings with Vishnu or to make it subject to the condition that he should  

meet Vishnu only in the company of Pranav, to allay the apprehensions of  

the mother and the elder son. In our view the following arrangement would  

meet the ends of justice:

The father,  Neeraj Bhasin will be free to take out Vishnu from his  

mother’s residence on every Saturday. On the first and third Saturdays of the  

month he can keep Vishnu with him for a period of six hours, from 10 am to  

4 pm. On the second and fourth Saturdays of the month the outing of Vishnu  

with his father may last for eight hours, from 10 am to 6 pm. (The period of  

outing is fixed by this order but the hours may be flexible and may be fixed  

for the coming week subject to the mutual convenience of the parties). On  

each occasion it would be open to Pranav to accompany his father and the  

younger brother but Vishnu’s meetings with the father as indicated above  

will not be dependent upon Pranav joining him. Similarly, it will not be open  

to the father not to take along Pranav if he wished to join them and to insist  

that he would take out only Vishnu.

4

Before parting with the record of the case, we may say that as the  

situation stands,  there  is  a  grave danger of  it  further  deteriorating into a  

competition between the husband and the wife to capture the mind and the  

affections  of  Vishnu.  Should  such a  situation  develop,  it  would  be  most  

harmful for Vishnu, as he would be likely to develop divided loyalties and  

eventually a divided personality. We hope that the parents, though fighting  

between themselves would not allow such a situation to arise and put Vishnu  

to harm.  

All the observations made here are for the purpose of this order and  

any observations or comments made in this order shall not be used to the  

benefit or prejudice of any of the parties in any collateral proceedings.

The arrangement as indicated above is made in view of the facts and  

circumstances  now  being  in  existence.  In  case  there  is  any  material  

development or alteration in the relevant facts and circumstances concerning  

the  parties  it  will  be  open  to  the  court  in  seisen  of  the  case  to  pass  

appropriate orders in accordance with law. In such event the aggrieved party  

will seek his/her remedies as may be available in law. As and when vacation  

starts in the children’s school it  would be open to the father to move the  

learned Guardianship Judge to re-fix the hours of meeting with the children  

and also  to  ask  for  keeping  the  children  with  him overnight.  If  such  an  

5

application  is  filed  the  learned  Judge  will  consider  the  rival  contentions  

(which are expressly kept open) and pass appropriate orders, in accordance  

with law.  

The  special  leave  petition  stands  disposed  of  with  the  above  

observations and directions.    

 …………………………………………….J

( AFTAB ALAM )

                      …………………………………………….J

          ( T.S. THAKUR )

New Delhi, March 18, 2010

6

7