SC irked over Dubai court order restricting child's travel in matrimonial dispute

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has criticised an order of a Dubai court restricting the travel of a minor child in an matrimonial dispute and called it “atrocious” and “violative of human rights”.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh has issued notice on a habeas corpus plea of the child’s father, who is a citizen of Ghana and resides in Dubai, UAE, on the limited aspect of visitation rights.

“Issue notice for the limited purpose of granting visitation rights to the petitioner along with other ancillary reliefs, returnable on April 28, 2025,” the bench ordered April 17.

During the hearing, the bench observed that imposing a travel ban by a court in a matrimonial dispute would virtually amount to “house arrest”.

The father alleged that his estranged wife, a resident of Bengaluru, took away their son from Dubai to India despite orders from a court in Dubai and claimed it was illegal confinement.

Taking note of the facts, Justice Surya Kant told senior advocate Nikhil Goel, appearing for the petitioner, “It was alleged that she (wife) was virtually being held in confinement. You secured a court an ‘atrocious’ order which was in complete violation of human rights. How can a court issue a travel ban on a child in a matrimonial dispute”.

The bench said any court, which believes in human rights will not like to pass any such order as this would amount to putting someone in house arrest without holding them guilty.

The top court, which also questioned the jurisdiction of the Dubal family court in passing a decree of divorce and noted that both husband and wife were Christians and not bound by Shariah law.

Goel submitted that both parties were married in Dubai and were residing there.

The bench said it would go by the fact that welfare of the child was paramount and noted that the decision of the Karnataka High Court was correct in leaving it to the local family court to decide the issues related to the dispute.

The husband has challenged the December 10 order of the high court saying it erred in deciding his habeas corpus plea.

Before the high court, the husband sought a direction to the authorities to produce their minor child before the court and hand over the custody to him.

He claimed they married on April 19, 2018 under Foreign Marriage Act of 1969 and it was solemnised and registered at Consulate General of India in Dubai.

Their child was born on January 24, 2019 and the family resided in Dubai till 2021.

He submitted the wife then took away their child and returned to India.

The wife denied the allegations of absconding or evading the court orders and said her travel to Muscat and later to India was necessitated by the physical, emotional and psychological abuse inflicted by her estranged husband, also adversely impacting the child.

She contended her estranged husband imposed an unlawful travel ban on their son.

She said the judgment of the Dubai court, granting custody to the husband was based on Shariah law, which was inapplicable to the parties, as they were Christians married under the Foreign Marriage Act.

Get the latest updates in , , , , and on & by subscribing to our channels. You can also download our app for and .