New Delhi: The Calcutta High Court has issued a set of custody and parenting guidelines, in a move aimed at reducing emotional trauma children endure during parental separation, and to emphasise the importance of a child’s right to the love and affection of both parents.
Intended to address the lack of judicial uniformity in custody matters, the new Child Access & Custody Guidelines, along with the Parenting Plan 2025, spell out a comprehensive framework for interim and final visitation, including specific schedules based on the child’s age and the parents’ proximity.
The preface, authored by Acting Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justices Arijit Banerjee and Suvra Ghosh, addresses complex issues such as joint custody, parental alienation syndrome (PAS) and the mandatory need for psychological evaluation of both parents and the child to protect children from being manipulated during custody disputes.
By prioritising shared parenting, structured visitation and safeguards against alienation, the guidelines seek to transform custody litigation from a contest of parental rights into a process centred around children’s emotional and developmental needs.
The framework marks a shift away from outdated custody norms, ensuring that in the turbulence of marital disputes, the child’s well-being remains the guiding principle.
Also Read: Multi-billion dollar firm Rippling co-founder’s bitter custody battle plays out in full public glare
Background and birth of the guidelines
The guidelines are applicable across the state of West Bengal and the Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar Islands. They will assist family courts, civil courts, and any forum deciding child custody, including proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act of 2005.
While the guidelines provide detailed schedules for interim and final visitation, they also give judges the discretion to adapt arrangements depending on the circumstances of each case, provided the welfare of the child remains paramount.
Courts have also been authorised to appoint special officers such as child psychologists or social workers to supervise visitations and submit reports, ensuring compliance and minimising the possibility of manipulation.
The guidelines to address acute problems arising from custody and care disputes involving minor offspring, especially in divorce cases, come after a serious need was felt to ensure that a child’s rights are protected swiftly and scientifically.
The guidelines note that children bear the brunt of legal battles, often being used as “pawns in the game of emotional chess”. This “irresponsible parenting” results in severe emotional and psychological trauma for the children, potentially leading to major depressive disorder, conduct disorder, substance abuse and antisocial inclination later in life, ultimately resulting in the “loss of invaluable national wealth”.
A major driving factor for the reform is the vagueness and uncertainty surrounding the current standard for deciding custody cases: the “best interest and welfare of the child”.
Noting a lack of judicial consensus and uniformity, which leaves the child’s interest unprotected in fiercely fought custody battles, these guidelines serve as a reminder of child rights in cases involving marital disputes.
Existing statutes governing guardianship and custody—The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956—require a re-look and suitable amendments to sync with modern-day scenarios and international conventions.
The 82-page set of guidelines emphasise the paramount importance of a child growing up with love and respect towards both parents and loved ones, including grandparents, for lifelong emotional and mental health and stability.
According to the guidelines, depriving a child of love and affection of both parents can cause long-term consequences such as “out of wedlock birth”, “premature sexuality”, “chronic depression” and “drug abuse”, and often become a “major force behind serious crimes”.
Genesis of the guidelines
The framework for these new guidelines stems primarily from the ‘Child Access and Custody Guidelines and Parenting Plan’ published in 2014 by the Child Rights Foundation, an NGO based in Navi Mumbai. These guidelines aimed at promoting joint parenting and visitation rights to enhance the child’s emotional health post-separation.
The Law Commission of India referred to these NGO guidelines in its 257th report, ‘Reforms in Guardianship and Custody Laws in India May 2015’.
Thereafter, these guidelines are a result of two separate PILs filed in 2021 and 2022. In 2021, Dr Ratul Roy and Ayushman Initiative for Child Rights filed a petition to frame appropriate guidelines based on the Child Rights Foundation’s model, as the state of West Bengal and the Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar Islands lacked them.
In July 2022, acting on another PIL, the high court gave directions to the Rule Committee to frame appropriate guidelines for child access and child custody, along with a parental plan. Thereafter, in 2023, the Rule Committee invited objections and suggestions from district judges, the director of the Judicial Academy of West Bengal, child psychologists and other relevant stakeholders. A sub-committee was appointed in April 2023 to formulate a draft. The guidelines were finally approved by the Rule Committee in a meeting held on 24 September 2024 and released thereafter.
Also Read: CBI to aid custody battle? Why SC wants probe agency’s help in international row over 3-yr-old
Push for mediating conflicts
At the heart of the Parenting Plan 2025 lies the principle that both parents share equal responsibility for their child’s upbringing. The guidelines presume that shared parenting is in the best interest of the child, ensuring that they maintain meaningful relationships with both parents and extended family members, including grandparents and cousins.
While joint custody is generally encouraged, the court noted exceptions where the child is very young and requires maternal care or in cases where one parent has a history of violence. The framework discourages the notion of one parent being reduced to a “visitor” in the child’s life, instead promoting arrangements where children spend substantial and regular time with both parents.
Structured visitation schedules
The guidelines lay down detailed schedules for visitation. For children under three years, non-custodial parents must be granted at least three hours of visitation per week. For older children, different models are prescribed depending on geographical proximity.
Where parents live within 200 km of each other, the non-custodial parent is entitled to alternate weekend visits from Friday evening to Sunday evening, or overnight access once every week. If the distance is under 30 km, two evening visits per week are mandated.
Holiday schedules override regular arrangements, with the non-custodial parent entitled to half of long vacations such as Durga Puja, Christmas or summer holidays.
Courts are also encouraged to facilitate child-friendly environments for meetings, rather than limiting access to formal court premises.
Tackling parental alienation
A notable feature of the guidelines is the recognition of Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), where one parent manipulates the child into rejecting the other parent.
Courts are instructed to remain vigilant for signs of such behaviour, including derogatory remarks or repeated denial of access. If such conduct is proven with conclusive evidence, the court may go so far as to shift custody from the custodial parent to the non-custodial one.
To deter non-compliance, the guidelines allow courts to award compensatory access for missed visitation, impose heavy fines, direct alienating parents to undergo counselling or, in severe cases, transfer custody altogether.
Psychological evaluations and safeguards
The guidelines also empower courts to order psychiatric or psychological assessments of both parents and children. Through play therapy and other tools, such evaluations can reveal emotional manipulation or “poisoning of the mind” by one parent against the other.
The guidelines make clear that issues of child support and visitation are independent.
Non-payment of maintenance cannot be a ground to deny visitation, nor can denial of access justify withholding financial support. Both responsibilities must be enforced separately to safeguard the child’s welfare.
Relocation, abduction and cross-border parenting
The guidelines impose strict safeguards against unilateral relocation or abduction by custodial parents. A custodial parent cannot change the child’s name or relocate abroad without either court approval or the written consent of the non-custodial parent. Even local moves require 90 days’ advance notice to avoid disruption of visitation schedules.
Where parents live abroad, courts may provide for online visitation rights through video calls and grant custody to the non-custodial parent during vacations, ensuring that children do not lose contact with either parent.
Custody alternatives & limitation period
Recognising that both parents may sometimes be unfit to raise the child, the guidelines permit custody to be placed with grandparents, other relatives or foster homes, but only under strict supervision. This ensures that children are not left in unsafe environments due to the shortcomings of their parents.
The framework also introduces a limitation period: custody claims must be filed within 90 days of denial of access, unless valid reasons are shown. Beyond this, courts may presume that the claimant lacks genuine intent, thereby discouraging frivolous or delayed litigation.
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: Child custody to inheritance, how personal laws shape family dynamics in India