- 19-Sep-2025
- Elder & Estate Planning law
In cases where parents are separated or divorced, and the child lives with one parent while visiting the other for regular visits or vacation time, travel expenses can become a point of contention. This is particularly true if one parent resides in a different city or country. Often, the court may step in to determine how these travel costs should be shared between the parents. Ensuring that travel arrangements and costs are handled fairly is important for maintaining a child’s right to visitation and fostering a healthy relationship with both parents, regardless of the logistical or financial challenges.
In many cases, the court may order shared responsibility for travel expenses if one parent lives far from the child. This is especially common when the custodial parent lives in one location and the non-custodial parent lives in a different city, state, or country. The court generally aims to ensure that the child has equal access to both parents, and if travel costs are a barrier, the court may order that the costs be divided in a way that’s fair to both parties.
Under Section 125 of the CrPC, which governs maintenance and support for children, the court has the power to order one parent to pay for the child’s needs, including support and maintenance. In cases of long-distance visitation, this could extend to covering the travel costs. This decision depends on the financial capacity of both parents and the circumstances surrounding the visitation.
A key factor in determining whether travel expenses should be shared is the financial capacity of each parent. If one parent has significantly higher income, the court may order that parent to bear a larger share of the travel costs. On the other hand, if both parents are equally financially responsible or have similar financial resources, the court may order that the costs be divided evenly.
The distance between the parents' residences plays a significant role in determining travel costs. If the child must travel long distances (e.g., to another state or country), the court will consider whether the travel is feasible for the child and if the parents can afford it. The court may also consider how often the child is expected to visit the non-custodial parent and whether these visits are regular or occasional.
In some cases, the parents may reach a mutual agreement on sharing travel costs before the court gets involved. If the parents are able to work out a reasonable arrangement, the court may approve this arrangement as part of the visitation agreement. However, if the parents cannot agree, the court will step in to ensure that the child’s best interests are served, which includes maintaining the relationship with both parents without burdening either parent financially.
The overarching principle in family law is that decisions must be made in the best interests of the child. The court will evaluate whether the travel costs impact the child’s access to the non-custodial parent. If the costs are too high, it might affect the child’s ability to maintain a relationship with both parents, which could prompt the court to order shared responsibility for the costs. However, if a parent’s financial situation makes it difficult to share costs, the court may reduce the frequency of visits or make adjustments to the arrangement.
The further apart the parents live, the higher the travel costs typically are. The court will take into account the mode of travel (airfare, train, car, etc.), the distance (whether local, inter-state, or international), and the time it takes for the child to travel.
Courts will carefully consider the income levels and financial capacity of both parents. If one parent is in a significantly better financial position, the court may allocate a larger portion of the travel expenses to that parent.
The court will also consider the frequency of the child’s visits to the non-custodial parent. For instance, if the child visits only once a year, the travel costs may be divided differently than if visits occur on a monthly or quarterly basis.
If the child is very young, long-distance travel may not be feasible or in the child’s best interests. The child’s age and maturity are important in determining whether travel is necessary and how often it should occur. In such cases, the court may adjust travel arrangements accordingly.
Special circumstances, such as health issues or special needs, may also influence the court’s decision. If a child has health problems that make frequent travel difficult or unsafe, the court may modify visitation schedules or the sharing of travel costs.
Ramesh and Priya have a 10-year-old son, Aman. Ramesh lives in Bangalore, while Priya and Aman reside in Delhi. Ramesh wants to have regular weekend visits with Aman, but the airfare and travel costs are a concern.
Yes, in many cases, the court can order both parents to share the travel costs associated with visitation. The allocation of such costs depends on various factors, including the distance between the parents’ residences, their financial capacity, and the frequency of visitation. The court's primary goal is to ensure that the child’s best interests are served, promoting a healthy relationship with both parents while also considering the financial realities of each parent. If an agreement cannot be reached between the parents, the court will step in to ensure that travel expenses are shared equitably.
Answer By Law4u Team
Discover clear and detailed answers to common questions about Marriage and Divorce Laws. Learn about procedures and more in straightforward language.
