Santanu Ghosh vs Prof. Sanghamitra Banerjee

Shivakant Prasad, J

This writ petition is under the scheme of Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the petitioner has prayed for right of visitation to meet his son through video link.

It is submitted that for Covid -19 the pandemic situation the petitioner is not in a position to meet his son physically and the opposite party does not like the petitioner to meet his son virtually. My attention is invited to an order dated 28.08.2019 passed in Misc. Case No.248 of 2018 by the learned Additional District Judge, Barasat, under Section 12 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890. The learned Trial Judge has allowed the prayer of the petitioner for visitation right as sought for by him and was permitted to meet his male child at the Compound of Ramkrishna Mission, Barrackpore & River side Road, Barrackpore, Kolkata 120 on every Saturday of the week from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. for three months, upon hearing the opposite party Shri Sanghamitra Banerjee, mother of the male child was accordingly directed to bring her male child at the compound of Ramkrishna Mission, Barrackpore on every Saturday during the said period for three months and the Court was supposed to review the matter after receiving the report from both the parties.

The date was fixed for hearing of the Miscellaneous Case, it appears that there was no problem in visitation before the pre‐locked down period due to pandemic situation which cropped up due to Covid - 19. My further attention is invited to the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the civil diary no.11058 of 2020 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court in general has given very innocuous order in order to tide over the grievance of the petitioner due to lock down that the children are unable to interact with their parents even though they have visitation right for the purpose and if they have visitation rights, the Hon'ble Supreme Court suggested that electronic contact instead of physical visits can be substituted in these times.

Accordingly, the parties were asked to arrive at mutual consent and arrangement in this behalf with further direction that the petitioner can approach the family Court.

Mr. Bose learned advocate appearing for the opposite party‐wife submits that the application under the scheme of Article 227 is not maintainable for the reason that the petitioner has suppressed the fact; secondly, that the opposite party is suffering from some ailments; thirdly, that the petitioner ought to have attended the Court below for modification of such an order for visitation through electronic media. The revisional application under Article 227 could be maintainable or would not be maintainable is a matter of issue or to be heard on its merit when the normalcy is restored after the locked down and the Court starts functioning but taking cue from the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision aforesaid, this Court is pleased to give liberty to the petitioner for visitation right through electronic media that may be through whatsapp or any other video link which may be available between the parties. Accordingly, such modification of order is granted as an interim measure till the normalcy is made out.

Since, I have already heard the parties on its merit, I do not find any reason to keep this petition alive and is disposed of in the terms stated above with the right to the petitioner to make contact with his son through electronic media or virtual mode.

CO 1118 of 2020 and CAN 3155 of 2020 are disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.