NEW DELHI: A Delhi family court has directed cricketer Shikhar Dhawan's estranged wife Aesha Mukherjee, who is residing in Australia, to bring their nine-year-old son Zoravar to India for a family gathering next month, observing that a mother alone does not possess exclusive rights over a child.
Earlier, the court had declined Dhawan's plea on the ground that the child may miss classes at school and the get-together was not important enough to make him miss his studies.
Thereafter, the cricketer moved another application submitting that the get-together has been rescheduled to coincide with the school holidays of the child.
Again, it was opposed by Aesha arguing that the family function would be a 'flop show' as most of the extended family members were not consulted before fixing the date.
"The mother alone does not have rights over the child, why then is she opposing the petitioner meeting his own child when he is not a bad father," Judge Harish Kumar of the family court at Delhi's Patiala House Courts said.
The court clarified that the petitioner is not seeking permanent custody but simply wants to have his child here for a few days, saying 'her unwillingness may not be justified.'
The court also noted that Shikhar's family has not met the child since August 2020. Even if many did not show up for the function, the cricketer and his parents will have the "joy of having the company of their eye's apple," it said.
There are legal cases involving the couple in both India and Australia related to their divorce and custody of the minor child.
In the 14-page order, the judge observed that Dhawan has traveled to Australia for years to be with his son and has been a hands-on parent and affectionate father and it was also admitted by Aesha.
The court highlighted that the "blame for polluting the environment within the family has to be shared by both."
"A dispute arises when one raises concerns and the other does not appreciate them or pay attention," it said.
"Her objection on the expense might be justified and consequent objection might be alright but her unwillingness may not be justified. She has not been able to put forth what her fear is about the petitioner qua the child and why she approached the court in Australia to put him on the watch list. If the petitioner had intended to take the law in his own hands for taking the custody of the child, he would not have approached the court in India," it added.
Last month, the court had pulled up Aesha for questioning the jurisdiction of the Indian court for dealing with the issue of bringing the child to India for attending the family function.