1. Legal Basis for Counselling Orders

(A) Family Courts Act, 1984

• Section 9: Duty of Family Courts to make efforts for settlement and reconciliation
• Courts can refer parties to:
  • counsellors
  • mediation centres
  • conciliation officers

(B) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

• Order XXXIIA CPC: Special procedure for family disputes encouraging settlement
• Courts can adjourn proceedings for counselling attempts

(C) Constitution of India

• Article 21: Right to dignity and mental well-being
• Courts use counselling to reduce psychological harm in litigation

(D) Mediation Act, 2023

• Promotes court-referred mediation and structured settlement mechanisms
• Applies strongly to matrimonial disputes

(E) Guardians and Wards Act, 1890

• Welfare of child is paramount (Section 17)
• Courts may order counselling for parents in custody disputes

2. Nature of Counselling Orders

Counselling orders may require parties to:

✔ Attend Family Court counselling sessions

✔ Participate in mediation programs

✔ Undergo psychological evaluation (if needed)

✔ Attend co-parenting counselling

✔ Attempt reconciliation before divorce proceedings proceed

3. Objectives of Counselling Orders

Courts issue counselling orders to:

✔ 1. Explore possibility of reconciliation

✔ 2. Reduce emotional hostility

✔ 3. Protect children from conflict exposure

✔ 4. Assess mental and emotional stability of parties

✔ 5. Encourage amicable settlement

✔ 6. Prevent prolonged litigation

4. When Courts Issue Counselling Orders

Counselling is commonly ordered in:

• Divorce petitions
• Custody disputes
• Domestic violence cases (non-severe)
• Maintenance disputes
• Restitution of conjugal rights cases
• High-conflict co-parenting situations

5. Legal Effect of Counselling Orders

✔ Mandatory in appearance

• Parties must attend when ordered

✔ Not binding in outcome

• Parties are not forced to reconcile

✔ Advisory reports

• Counsellor submits report to court
• Court uses it for decision-making

6. Important Case Laws (Supreme Court of India)

1. K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa (2013) 5 SCC 226

• Supreme Court strongly emphasized court-referred mediation and counselling in matrimonial disputes
• Held that reconciliation should be attempted before granting divorce in appropriate cases.

👉 Principle: Counselling is an essential judicial step in family disputes.

2. Jagdish Singh v. Madhuri Devi (2008) 10 SCC 497

• Court held Family Courts have a statutory duty to promote settlement
• Counselling is integral to this duty.

👉 Principle: Courts must actively facilitate reconciliation efforts.

3. Gaurav Nagpal v. Sumedha Nagpal (2009) 1 SCC 42

• Court emphasized child welfare in custody disputes
• Recognized importance of stable emotional environment.

👉 Principle: Counselling supports child-centric custody decisions.

4. Nil Ratan Kundu v. Abhijit Kundu (2008) 9 SCC 413

• Court highlighted psychological welfare of children in custody disputes
• Emotional stability of parents is relevant.

👉 Principle: Counselling helps assess parenting capability.

5. Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 344

• Court upheld institutional mediation and ADR systems
• Encouraged courts to use mediation centers.

👉 Principle: Counselling and mediation are core judicial tools.

6. Hitesh Bhatnagar v. Deepa Bhatnagar (2011) 5 SCC 234

• Court stressed reconciliation efforts under Family Courts Act
• Emphasized structured attempts to save marriage.

👉 Principle: Counselling is mandatory consideration before divorce.

7. Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan (2015) 5 SCC 705

• Court emphasized dignity and humane treatment in matrimonial disputes
• Recognized emotional suffering in marital breakdown.

👉 Principle: Counselling must protect dignity and mental health.

7. Compliance with Counselling Orders

Courts expect:

✔ Genuine participation

✔ Good faith attendance

✔ Cooperation with counsellors

Failure to comply may:

• negatively affect custody decisions
• influence maintenance outcomes
• be viewed as non-cooperative behavior

8. Limitations of Counselling Orders

Counselling is NOT appropriate when:

• serious criminal violence is involved
• there is ongoing abuse or danger
• parties refuse consent in irreconcilable cases
• counselling is used to delay justice

9. Role of Counsellors in Court-Ordered Programs

Counsellors:

• assess emotional compatibility
• facilitate communication
• evaluate reconciliation feasibility
• submit neutral reports to court

But:

• do NOT decide legal rights
• do NOT bind court decisions

10. Key Legal Principles

✔ 1. Counselling is part of judicial process in family law

✔ 2. Courts prioritize reconciliation before dissolution

✔ 3. Child welfare is central in counselling orders

✔ 4. Counselling outcomes are advisory, not binding

✔ 5. Participation is mandatory, but reconciliation is voluntary

Conclusion

Counselling orders by courts in India reflect a shift toward restorative and therapeutic justice in family disputes. Courts use counselling not to impose reconciliation, but to ensure that decisions on marriage, custody, and maintenance are made after exploring emotional, psychological, and practical realities of family breakdown.