A man, accused of kidnapping his toddler daughter and taking her to Dubai illegally, has been sentenced to six months in jail by the Delhi High Court for contempt.
The high court took a strong exception to the man's "contumacious conduct".
"The man has not only clandestinely as well as illegally removed the baby from the jurisdiction of this court, but has also tried to acquire diplomatic immunity subsequent to being held guilty of criminal contempt of court, changed his citizenship as well as religion and passport to change the applicable law and to defeat binding consensual court orders," a bench of Justices Manmohan and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said.
The court sentenced him to 6-month imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 2,000 and directed the registry to prepare the necessary warrants forthwith.
It asked the Centre and the CBI to file a status report a day prior to the next date of hearing, December 3.
Despite giving an undertaking to the high court that the two-and-a half-year-old girl will not be taken out of the national capital and her passport deposited in the court, the man chose to flee the country with the minor in a "pre-planned manner".
The court noted that it had on November 20, directed that the man along with the child be present before it today but neither of them turned up.
"This court is of the view that the man by not appearing today along with the baby has compounded the contempt," it said.
The man, through senior advocate Geeta Luthra, claimed that the Delhi High Court has no jurisdiction to hear the habeas corpus plea by his estranged wife seeking production of the girl as all three of them were foreign nationals.
The counsel said the man was enjoying diplomatic immunity as he is 'An Ambassador of an Intergovernmental Institution for the Use of Micro Algae Spirulina Against Malnutrition (IIMSAM)'.
Senior advocate Dayan Krishnan and lawyer Malvika Rajkotia, representing the child's mother, argued that the man was neither a diplomat nor any exchange of credentials have taken place between him and the Indian Government.
The court said the man has not placed even a single document on record to establish his point and though a photocopy of his diplomatic passport was sought to be flashed during the hearing, it cannot be taken at its face value as neither its original nor any certificate issued by the Centre on legal immunity, has been produced.
"Moreover, in the present proceeding, the man is being held guilty for the acts committed by him prior to becoming a diplomat, if any," it said, adding that, "In any event, if the man is a diplomat, according to Union of India, then at the highest the sentencing order shall not be given effect to till he is a diplomat."
On the man's contention that being a biological father, he cannot be held guilty for kidnapping, the court said he has been held guilty of criminal contempt of court and not for kidnapping inasmuch as he procured a second passport for the child from Commonwealth of Dominica when her supposedly exclusive passport issued by the Indian Government had been deposited with the high court registry.
In August, the high court has initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against the man when he violated the terms of an earlier order relating to handing over the custody of the child.
In August, when the girl was with the man, he in connivance with others took a flight to Bagdogra in West Bengal and crossed Nepal. He flew out from Kathmandu on Qatar Airways to Doha, then to Muscat and reached Dubai.
This prompted the mother, who was earlier granted the child's interim custody, to file a habeas corpus in the Delhi High Court seeking production of the girl as she was not returned to her by the man. The father and grandparents were granted visitation rights.
A habeas corpus plea requires a person under unlawful custody to be brought before a judge or a court.
In September, the man was held guilty of contempt of court by the high court for flouting the judicial order and taking the child out of country despite giving an undertaking.
A family court has also declared the mother to be the guardian and custodian of the child for "her paramount interest and welfare".
The woman had earlier told the court that in 2017, her father-in-law had taken the baby to Bangkok for a trip and from there, he took her to Dubai where he has a residence.
When she went to Dubai, she was not allowed to meet the child after which she approached the court and the minor was brought back to Delhi.
The high court had earlier made it clear that both the parents shall strictly abide by the interim custody and visitation arrangement and other conditions, and if it is reported that either of the two parties have not complied with this condition, or have resisted its compliance, the court shall reconsider the arrangement.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
