'How Can He Leave For US?': Supreme Court Issues Arrest Warrant Against Father In International Custody Battle
The custody battle for a 10-year-old child with autism took a dramatic turn when the father escaped to the United States to be with the boy after his 'health deteriorated'
The Supreme Court has expressed surprise over the escape of a man to the USA, even though he faced contempt proceedings before it, in a child custody matter and his passport remained in the custody of the court.
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Prashant Kumar Mishra directed the union home ministry to take every possible step under the law to arrest the man so that he is brought to justice.
related stories
“We are amazed as to how can the alleged contemnor/respondent leave for USA or for that matter for any country without a passport, as his passport is in the custody of this Court. Be that as it may, now today we have no option but to issue non-bailable warrant against the alleged contemnor/respondent. Non bailable warrant is hereby issued against the respondent, let the same be executed in accordance with law," the court said in its order on January 29.
The court asked additional solicitor general KM Nataraj to assist in the matter.
“Nataraj shall apprise this court as to how the respondent was permitted to leave this country without a passport and leave of this court. With the assistance of Home Ministry, Govt. of India, he may also enquire and apprise this court as to who assisted the respondent in escaping from the country and who are the officials and other persons involved in this," the bench said.
The court posted the matter for further hearing on February 19, 2025.
The court was dealing with the contempt petition filed by the man’s wife over his failure to comply with the terms of the settlement of their disputes made before the Supreme Court.
The bench framed charges against the man on September 9, 2024.
The marriage of the parties in the case at hand was solemnised on February 08, 2006, and later they moved to the United States of America. A male child with autism was born to them, and he is presently 10 years old.
However, the couple had marital discord, and the man obtained a divorce decree on September 12, 2017, from the Circuit Court for the County of Oakland (Family Division), Michigan, USA.
On the other hand, the petitioner had also initiated multiple proceedings against the respondent in India, but much later a settlement was reached between the parties before this court on October 21, 2019.
“One of the grounds for settlement was that the alleged contemnor/respondent would give the custody of the child to the mother i.e., the petitioner. Since this was not done, contempt proceedings were initiated on a petition moved by the petitioner-mother as the child was not handed over," the bench said.
Following the orders on September 26, 2022, and November 10, 2022, the alleged contemnor/respondent was asked to be present before this court. He was present in the court on December 13, 2022, though virtually.
By the order on January 17, 2024, he was asked to remain present in the court in all proceedings.
“Before this, as the order of this court would indicate there were several attempts to resolve the matter, as it was a matter of child custody where this court went out of its way in granting indulgence to the respondent in hope that he would handover the child to his mother and honour the terms of his settlement, which were a part of the order of this court. All the same, all efforts of this court went in vain," the bench said.
On January 22, 2025, the SC noted, the alleged contemnor/respondent was not present, which was in violation of the order of this court, when a statement was made by senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing him, that he should be present on the next date of listing.
“Now the matter is fixed for today. Even on the last occasion Vipin Sanghi, senior counsel for the petitioner has expressed grave apprehension that the alleged contemnor/respondent may have already fled the country. Today, we have been informed by none other but the learned Singh, appearing for the alleged contemnor/respondent that the alleged contemnor/respondent had left for USA," the bench said.
In its order, the bench made it clear that any business transactions, including any deal relating to his property in India during the contempt proceedings, would be subject to the order of this court.
- Location :
- First Published: