Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Mohtashem Billah Malik vs Sana Aftab on 24 August, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, Sanjay Dhar
Sr. No.1
Suppl. List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CJ Court
CCP(D) No.4/2023
In LPA No.216/2022
CM Nos.1704 & 4914/2023
MOHTASHEM BILLAH MALIK ...PETITIONER(S)
Through: - Mr. Altaf Haqani, Sr. Adv. with
M/S. Shakir Haqani & Asif Wani, Advocate.
Vs.
SANA AFTAB ...RESPONDENT(S)
Through: - M/S: Shabir Ahmad Najar & Jehangir Rehbar, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER (ORAL)
24.08.2023 Sanjay Dhar 'J'
1) The petitioner has sought initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for having violated the undertaking given by her to the Court, in terms whereof the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the petitioner bearing LPA No.216/2022 was disposed of vide order dated 01.12.2022.
2) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3) It appears that the petitioner had filed a Letters Patent Appeal bearing LPA No.216/2022 before this Court and during the proceedings of the said appeal, on 01.12.2022, the respondent made the following statement:
CCP(D) No.4/2023 in LPA No.216/2022 1|Page I state that I intend to go back to Qatar well before the date of re-opening of the school of my elder son namely Malik Karim Billah and in this regard I undertake that I will be in Qatar well before 2nd of January, 2023, that is the date of reopening of the school. I will also take all necessary steps for obtaining residency permit in respect my younger son namely Malik Rahim Billah, being his sponsor now as the marriage between me and the petitioner stands dissolved in terms of the orders passed by the Family Court at Qatar
4) In terms of the aforesaid statement of the respondent, the appeal was disposed of as having been settled.
5) The grievance of the petitioner is that in terms of the undertaking given by the respondent before this Court, the respondent was supposed to go back to Qatar well before the date of re-opening of the school of her elder son, namely, Malik Karim Billah as she had undertaken to be in Qatar well before 2nd January, 2023. It has been further submitted that the respondent had also undertaken to take necessary steps for obtaining residency permit in respect of her younger son, namely, Malik Rahim Billah.
According to the petitioner, though the respondent did visit Qatar in the third week of December, 2022, yet she did not take her children along with her and that she did not take any steps for ensuring that her elder son reports back to the school upon its re- opening on 2nd January, 2023. It has been further submitted that the respondent also did not take any steps for obtaining residency permit in respect of her younger son.
6) The respondent in her statement of facts has submitted that she did visit Qatar on 19th December, 2022, and this fact is known to the petitioner but she was harassed by the petitioner and was not CCP(D) No.4/2023 in LPA No.216/2022 2|Page given the maintenance and alimony awarded by the Court at Qatar. She has further submitted in her statement of facts that false and frivolous cases were filed by the petitioner against her when she reached Qatar, as a result of which her QID was got blocked and it is in these circumstances, she had to return to Srinagar.
7) As per the undertaking given by the respondent to this Court, she was supposed to be at Qatar before 2nd January, 2023, so that her elder son, Malik Karim Billah, reaches there well before the date of reopening of the school. It is an admitted fact that the respondent did not take her children along with her to Qatar. This, prima facie, shows that she had no intention to honour the undertaking given by her to the Court. The reason respondent had given an undertaking to the Court was to ensure that her elder son resumes his studies at Qatar. The fact that the respondent did not take her children to Qatar and returned to India within a few days, prima facie, raises a question mark over her sincerity to honour the commitment made to the Court. If at all there was any difficulty in abiding by the terms of the undertaking, the respondent could have apprised this Court about these alleged difficulties by making an appropriate motion which she did not do. Thus, the respondent has, prima facie, violated the terms and spirit of the undertaking.
8) Accordingly, Rule is directed to be framed against the respondent. Let a notice be issued to the respondent asking her to show cause as to why she should not be proceeded against for having committed breach of the undertaking which amounts to CCP(D) No.4/2023 in LPA No.216/2022 3|Page contempt of the court. The reply to the show cause notice shall be furnished by the respondent by the next of hearing.
9) Be listed on 12.10.2023.
(SANJAY DHAR) (N. KOTISWAR SINGH)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Srinagar
24.08.2023
"Bhat Altaf, PS"
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
CCP(D) No.4/2023 in LPA No.216/2022 4|Page