The Calcutta High Court has directed an estranged Indian-Canadian couple to resolve their conflict through mutual dialogue to safeguard their five-year-old daughter's future. Justice Debangsu Basak emphasized that the court has no interest in the parents' dispute but is focused on the child's well-being. The bench suggested direct communication via video calls and arrangements for the child's return to Canada.
The Calcutta High Court recently voiced deep concern over the future of a five-year-old child caught in a custody dispute between an estranged Indian-Canadian couple during a hearing on a habeas corpus petition filed by the father. The couple married in 2014, and their daughter was born in Canada in 2020, where she holds citizenship. She was enrolled in a reputed Canadian school in 2024.
The mother, a Kolkata resident, left Canada with the child in January 2025, alleging mental harassment and infidelity by her husband, an Indian-origin Canadian citizen. The father has filed for divorce in a Canadian court and sought custody. The Canadian court ordered the mother and child to return by September 1, 2025, an order that remains uncomplied with.
The bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Mohammad Shabbar Rashidi summoned the mother for a private discussion and had her call her husband from the courtroom to clarify his arrival in India. The court stated, "We have no interest in the conflict between the parents. We are concerned about the child's future. A child's future cannot be ruined because of the conflict between parents."
The bench directed the husband to provide an undertaking for separate accommodation in Canada for the wife and child, bear all financial expenses, and refrain from entering the residence without permission. It urged direct talks between parents, not just via email, including daily calls and video interactions with the child. The court suggested outlining divorce terms, including maintenance, finances, household arrangements, and litigation costs, and considering withdrawal of proceedings in both countries.
Both parties must inform the court of their decisions in January, with hopes of a negotiated resolution. While observing the child's return to Canada, the bench equally emphasized the mother and child's well-being.
