30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

Skip to main content

Status: Pending
Case Number: WPHC 30/2023 Classification: Date of Filing: 11/04/2023
(KAHC010193182023) 13:27:17
Petitioner: DR. RAJEEV GIRI Pet. Advocate: N GOWTHAM
RAGHUNATH
Respondent: STATE OF Resp. Advocate:
KARNATAKA
Filing No.: WPHC 30/2023 Judge: ALOK ARADHE AND
ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Last Posted For: ORDERS Last Date of Action: Last Action Taken:
25/05/2023 ADJOURNED
Next Hearing Date:
05/06/2023

Daily Orders: WPHC 30/2023

1 ALOK ARADHE AND ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE 25/05/2023

Mr.S.Srivatsa, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner.

Mr.M.T.Nanaiah, learned Senior counsel had appeared on behalf of the
respondent No.3 on 22.05.2023 and had raised an objection with regard to
maintainability of the writ petition. He had sought adjournment to argue the writ
petition on the question of maintainability and to cite the case law.
However, when the matter is called today, Mr.M.T.Nanaiah, learned Senior
counsel is not present. Instead, Mr.M.C.Kumaraswamy, learned counsel has
appeared and prays for two weeks' time to enable him to file statement of
objections.
The aforesaid prayer is vehemently opposed by the learned Senior counsel for
the petitioner on the ground that the copy of the writ petition filed by the
petitioner was filed by the respondent No.3 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
He further submits that copy of writ petition along with Annexures has already
been supplied to respondent No.3 on 22.05.2023.
The case has a checkered history. However, in the interest of justice and by way
of indulgence, time till 05.06.2023 is granted to respondent No.3 to file
statement of objections, if any, failing which writ petition shall be heard without
statement of objections.
Respondent No.3 as well as minor daughter of the parties are directed not to
leave Bengaluru till further orders of this Court.
Mr.M.C.Kumaraswamy, learned counsel undertakes to appear and argue the
matter on the next date of hearing.
Respondent No.3 along with her daughter shall appear before this Court on
05.06.2023.
List on 05.06.2023.

Last Updated On: 2023-05-26 11:01:19

2 ALOK ARADHE AND ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE 22/05/2023

https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 1/7
30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

Copy of the writ petition has been handed over to the learned counsel appearing
for respondent No.2.
Learned Senior counsel submits that respondent No.3 and her minor daughter
namely Mayra Giri are present before this Court.
Leaned Senior counsel appearing for respondent No.3 states that respondent
No.3 and her minor daughter shall be present on the next date of hearing.
Learned Additional Government Advocate has placed the report pursuant to
Non-bailable warrant issued to respondent No.3.
Let the appeal be listed for further orders on 25.05.2023.

Last Updated On: 2023-05-26 12:55:25

3 S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR AND VENKATESH NAIK T 09/05/2023

https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 2/7
30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

In this petition, the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus by

directing respondent No.2-Station House Officer, HAL Police Station, to trace and
produce the petitioner’s minor daughter -Mayra Giri who is aged about 8 years.
Today, the learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo seeking the
following directions:-
“a. Direct the Commissioner of Police, New Delhi and/or any other Jurisdictional
Police Commissioner to extend all support to the Police team from Karnataka
sent there to apprehend the 3rd Respondent and bring her back with the child.
b. In view of the fact that it is apparent that the 3rd Respondent and her parents
are acting in concert, to arrest the parents of the 3rd Respondent for harbouring
the 3rd Respondent and aiding and abetting her in secreting the minor child.

c. Direct the Police to attach all bank accounts of the 3rd Respondent and her
father so that they would be starved of funds and bring an end to their present
conduct.

d. To take steps with the Ministry of Defense and Pension PayMaster to

attach/freeze the pension of the Father of the 3rd Respondent, Captain Dharam
Veer Singh, S/o Late Om Prakash, aged about 68 years.

e. Direct the Police to obtain statements from the advocates on record as to the
dates on which the 3rd Respondent met them and/or the telephone numbers
from which she called

f. Print and circulate pictures of the 3rd Respondent and the child in Karnataka,
New Delhi, Haryana, Punjab and Chandigarh.

g. Initiate suo moto Criminal and Civil Contempt of Court proceedings against
Respondent No. 3 for interfering and obstructing the administration of justice
and for violation of the orders passed by the Family Court in G & WC No.
128/2018, by this Hon'ble Court in MFA No. 2786/2022 and by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 4869/2023.

h. Initiation of Criminal proceedings under the Indian Penal Code (S. 363 of IPC)
for Kidnapping against Respondent No. 3, her parents and persons aiding
Respondent No. 3 and her parents.

i. If this Hon'ble Court deems fit to transfer the investigation to the CBI in view of
the inability of the Jurisdictional Police to trace Respondent No. 3 and the minor
child and the possibility of her fleeing from the country.

j. Direct the Police to contact her employer, Manipal Health Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.,
Annexe, Old Airport Road, Bengaluru to hold back all benefits and other monies
payable to her and to collect information regarding the present status of her
employment.”

Heard Sri Sreevatsa, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the
learned SPP-II for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the material placed on
record.
The learned SPP-II for the respondent-State has filed a memo enclosing a copy of
the report of Sri Bhadrinath, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime-II,
Bengaluru, who is present before the Court.
As can be seen from the said report, respondent No.3 is absconding along with
the minor child with the help and support of her parents Dharamveer Singh and
Sunita Singh. Under the circumstances, the request made by Sri Sreevatsa, the
learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner to permit the petitioner to
implead the parents of respondent No.3 as additional respondents to the
present petition is hereby accepted. The petitioner to carryout necessary
amendment and file the amended cause title by the next date of hearing.
After hearing the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court
passed the following order on 27.04.2023:-
“It is to be noticed that this Court on 19.04.2023 had directed the listing of this
petition on 27.04.2023 before the Vacation Bench. The extract of the order dated
19.04.2023 is as follows:-

"….From perusal of the record, it appears that leamed counsel for the petitioner
has been unable to serve hand summons on respondent No.3.

https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 3/7
30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

A note has been put up by the office that service of notice on respondent No.3 is
awaited. The Court Officer has handed over an e-mail which is sent by
respondent No.3 to the Registrar (Judicial). In the e-mail, it is clearly stated that
respondent No.3 is aware that the matter is listed today before this Court. In the
e-mail, a prayer has been made to engage a counsel and to avail for the legal
remedies.

Office is directed to prepare a notice and handover the same to the learned
State Public Prosecutor-2 who shall ensure that the aforesaid notice is served on
respondent No.3 through the Commissioner of Police..."

Sri V.S.Hegde, Learned State Public Prosecutor-2 upon instructions has filed the
Status Report and states that despite best efforts, the Police Authorities have not
been able to trace respondent No.3 and it is further submitted that there are
reasons to believe that the respondent No.3 is at Delhi.

Such submission is made on the basis of information furnished by

Mr.S.Badrinath, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime-2, Bengaluru, who is
present before the Court.

Sri S. Sreevatsa, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Ms.Ankitha G.

Shelke for the petitioner submits that the attitude of respondent No.3 has
created a grave doubt and there is possibility that respondent No.3 may move
away from the jurisdiction of Courts in India.

It is to be noticed the Family Court has allowed G & W C No.128/2018 by order

dated 03.03.2022, whereby the respondent No.3 was directed to hand over the
custody of the minor child to the custody of petitioner herein within one month
from the date of the said order. However, despite lapse of more than one year,
the order dated 03.03.2022 remains unexecuted.
It is to be noticed that MFA No.2786/2022 (GW) filed before this Court against the
order dated 03.03.2022 passed in G & WC No.128/2022 was also dismissed by a
reasoned order on 31.01.2023 and subsequently, the Special Leave petition (C)
No.4869/2023 filed before the Apex Court has also been rejected on 29.03.2023.
Despite efforts by respondent No.3 to seek reopening/recalling of the order
dated 29.03.2023 which has attained finality, for the present, there is no option
for her than to adhere to the directions passed in G & WC No.128/2018.

On an earlier occasion, when this Court had issued notice, it is noticed that
respondent No.3 has filed a memo in the Registry, in which it is clear that she is
aware of the hearing of the matter, despite which she is evading her presence.

It is also noticed from the Status Report filed by learned SPP-2 that efforts to
serve notice to respondent No.3 has not fructified, as respondent No.3 has
changed her residence and is not available at her Office also.

It is also submitted that Foreign Regional Registration Offices (FRRO) has been
informed and Look Out Notice has also been issued.

This is a matter requiring serious attention in light of respondent No.3 trying to

evade the Court process and it is clear that she does not intend to appear until
coercive steps are taken and even otherwise, it appears that the actions of
respondent No.3 amounts to an abuse of judicial process.

Accordingly, taking note of the previous orders and the fact that the order dated
03.03.2022 passed in G & WC No.128/2018 has attained finality, it would be just
and appropriate to ensure the presence of respondent No.3 before this Court.

Accordingly, issue Non-bailable Warrant to respondent No.3 to be executed

through the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru directing the said authority to
keep the respondent No.3 present before this Court.

Needless to state that in light of the order dated 03.03.2022 passed in G & WC
No.128/2018 and taking note of the power conferred under Section 25 of the
Guardians and Wards Act, 1977, while executing the Non-bailable Warrant, the
Police Authorities to ensure that the child accompanies respondent No.3 when
she is produced before this Court. It is also directed that the Police Authorities
shall take all such measures as may be appropriate to take care of the interests
https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 4/7
30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

of child during transit, in the event the respondent No.3 is arrested outside the
jurisdiction of this Court.

It is also clarified that while executing the Non-bailable Warrant in the event, the
respondent No.3 is at the jurisdiction outside Karnataka, the appropriate Police
Authorities are directed to co-operate in ensuring the execution of Non-bailable
Warrant issued to respondent No.3.

List the matter on 09.05.2023.”

As can be seen from the said order, the proceedings initiated by the petitioner-
father against respondent No.3-mother for custody of the minor child Mayra
Giri, aged about 8 years have culminated in favour of the petitioner before the
Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP No.4869/2023.
Respondent No.3 has not complied with the aforesaid order and has not handed
over the custody of minor child to the petitioner. Respondent No.3 is also
avoiding service of NBW upon her as directed by this Court. In spite of the best
efforts made by respondent Nos.1 and 2-Police Authorities as well as the Police
Authorities at Delhi, respondent No.3 is not traceable and the order passed by
this Court has not been complied with so far.
In similar circumstances, the High Court of Delhi, in the case of Kiran Lohia Vs.
State and others reported in 2020 SCC Online Del 1, has issued several
directions for the purpose of securing the presence of minor child.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, we deem it just and appropriate to
issue the following interim directions to secure the presence of the minor child
before this Court:-
a. The Commissioner of Police, New Delhi and/or any other Jurisdictional Police
Commissioner to extend all support to the Police team from Karnataka sent
there to apprehend the 3rd Respondent and bring her back with the child.
b. The Police to attach all bank accounts of the 3rd Respondent and her father so
that they would be starved of funds and bring an end to their present conduct.

c. The Ministry of Defense and Pension PayMaster to take steps to attach/freeze

the pension of the Father of the 3rd Respondent, Captain Dharam Veer Singh,
S/o Late Om Prakash, aged about 68 years.

d. The Police to obtain statements from the advocates on record as to the dates
on which the 3rd Respondent met them and/or the telephone numbers from
which she called

e. To Initiate suo moto Criminal and Civil Contempt of Court proceedings against
Respondent No. 3 for interfering and obstructing the administration of justice
and for violation of the orders passed by the Family Court in G & WC No.
128/2018, by this Hon'ble Court in MFA No. 2786/2022 and by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 4869/2023 in accordance with law.

f. To initiate Criminal proceedings under the Indian Penal Code (S. 363 of IPC) for
Kidnapping against Respondent No. 3, her parents and persons aiding
Respondent No. 3 and her parents in accordance with law.

g. The Police to contact her employer, Manipal Health Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.,
Annexe, Old Airport Road, Bengaluru to hold back all benefits and other monies
payable to her and to collect information regarding the present status of her
employment.

In addition to the aforesaid directions, the NBW issued by this Court earlier
against respondent No.3 to be re-issued.
Re-list on 22.05.2023.

Last Updated On: 2023-05-12 11:35:35

4 S SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND C.M. POONACHA 27/04/2023

https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 5/7
30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

It is to be noticed that this Court on 19.04.2023 had directed the listing of this
petition on 27.04.2023 before the Vacation Bench. The extract of the order dated
19.04.2023 is as follows:-
"…. From perusal of the record, it appears that learned counsel for the petitioner
has been unable to serve hand summons on respondent No.3.
A note has been put up by the office that service of notice on respondent No.3 is
awaited. The Court Officer has handed over an e-mail which is sent by
respondent No.3 to the Registrar (Judicial). In the e-mail, it is clearly stated that
respondent No.3 is aware that the matter is listed today before this Court. In the
e-mail, a prayer has been made to engage a counsel and to avail for the legal
remedies.
Office is directed to prepare a notice and handover the same to the learned
State Public Prosecutor-2 who shall ensure that the aforesaid notice is served on
respondent No.3 through the Commissioner of Police…."

Sri V.S.Hegde, Learned State Public Prosecutor-2 upon instructions has filed the
Status Report and states that despite best efforts, the Police Authorities have not
been able to trace respondent No.3 and it is further submitted that there are
reasons to believe that the respondent No.3 is at Delhi.

Such submission is made on the basis of information furnished by

Mr.S.Badrinath, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime-2, Bengaluru, who is
present before the Court.

Sri S. Sreevatsa, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Ms.Ankitha G.

Shelke for the petitioner submits that the attitude of respondent No.3 has
created a grave doubt and there is possibility that respondent No.3 may move
away from the jurisdiction of Courts in India.

It is to be noticed the Family Court has allowed G & W C No.128/2018 by order

dated 03.03.2022, whereby the respondent No.3 was directed to hand over the
custody of the minor child to the custody of petitioner herein within one month
from the date of the said order. However, despite lapse of more than one year,
the order dated 03.03.2022 remains unexecuted.
It is to be noticed that MFA No.2786/2022 (GW) filed before this Court against the
order dated 03.03.2022 passed in G & WC No.128/2022 was also dismissed by a
reasoned order on 31.01.2023 and subsequently, the Special Leave petition (C)
No.4869/2023 filed before the Apex Court has also been rejected on 29.03.2023.
Despite efforts by respondent No.3 to seek reopening/recalling of the order
dated 29.03.2023 which has attained finality, for the present, there is no option
for her than to adhere to the directions passed in G & WC No.128/2018.

On an earlier occasion, when this Court had issued notice, it is noticed that
respondent No.3 has filed a memo in the Registry, in which it is clear that she is
aware of the hearing of the matter, despite which she is evading her presence.

It is also noticed from the Status Report filed by learned SPP-2 that efforts to
serve notice to respondent No.3 has not fructified, as respondent No.3 has
changed her residence and is not available at her Office also.

It is also submitted that Foreign Regional Registration Offices (FRRO) has been
informed and Look Out Notice has also been issued.
Same is taken note of.

This is a matter requiring serious attention in light of respondent No.3 trying to

evade the Court process and it is clear that she does not intend to appear until
coercive steps are taken and even otherwise, it appears that the actions of
respondent No.3 amounts to an abuse of judicial process.

Accordingly, taking note of the previous orders and the fact that the order dated
03.03.2022 passed in G & WC No.128/2018 has attained finality, it would be just
and appropriate to ensure the presence of respondent No.3 before this Court.

Accordingly, issue Non-bailable Warrant to respondent No.3 to be executed

through the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru directing the said authority to
keep the respondent No.3 present before this Court.

Needless to state that in light of the order dated 03.03.2022 passed in G & WC
https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 6/7
30/05/2023, 21:00 High Court of Karnataka Official Web Site

No.128/2018 and taking note of the power conferred under Section 25 of the
Guardians and Wards Act, 1977, while executing the Non-bailable Warrant, the
Police Authorities to ensure that the child accompanies respondent No.3 when
she is produced before this Court. It is also directed that the Police Authorities
shall take all such measures as may be appropriate to take care of the interests
of child during transit, in the event the respondent No.3 is arrested outside the
jurisdiction of this Court.

It is also clarified that while executing the Non-bailable Warrant in the event, the
respondent No.3 is at the jurisdiction outside Karnataka, the appropriate Police
Authorities are directed to co-operate in ensuring the execution of Non-bailable
Warrant issued to respondent No.3.

List the matter on 09.05.2023

5 ALOK ARADHE AND VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL 19/04/2023

Smt.Ankitha G.Shelke, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr.V.S.Hegde, learned State Public Prosecutor-2 for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
From perusal of the record, it appears that learned counsel for the petitioner
has been unable to serve hand summons on respondent No.3.
A note has been put up by the office that service of notice on respondent No.3 is
awaited. The Court Officer has handed over an e-mail which is sent by
respondent No.3 to the Registrar (Judicial). In the e-mail, it is clearly stated that
respondent No.3 is aware that the matter is listed today before this Court. In the
e-mail, a prayer has been made to engage a counsel and to avail for the legal
remedies.
Office is directed to prepare a notice and handover the same to the learned
State Public Prosecutor-2 who shall ensure that the aforesaid notice is served on
respondent No.3 through the Commissioner of Police.
List on 27.04.2023 before the vacation Bench.
On the aforesaid date, appropriate order shall be passed.

6 ALOK ARADHE AND VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL 12/04/2023

Smt.Aakitha G.Shelke, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to comply

with the office objections during the course of the day.
Mr.V.S.Hegde, learned SPP-II accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and
2.
Issue emergent notice to respondent No.3.
In addition, learned counsel for the petitioner is at liberty to take out hand
summons for service of notice on respondent No.3.
List on 19.04.2023.

https://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/hckweb/casemenu.php 7/7