SREEJA V Vs. RAJESH PULIYANKALATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Original Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayers :

(2.) THE facts of the case briefly are as follows : THE petitioner herein is the respondent/wife in O.P.1513/08 on the file of the Family Court, Thrissur. THE respondent(husband) herein is the petitioner in that Original Petition, which was filed by him for divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act. THE marriage between the petitioner and the respondent took place on 7.6.1998 and a boy, namely, Adithya Rajesh was born in that wedlock on 23.6.2002 and now the boy is living with the petitioner and the boy is aged 8 years. In O.P.1513/08, the petitioner/husband in that Original Petition filed I.A.5338/10 for directing the respondent/wife to produce the minor child before Family Court and to provide the petitioner therein with sufficient orders to spend time and interact with the minor child. On 18.10.10, the petitioner and respondent were present and the Original Petition was posted for evidence on 27.11.2010. In I.A.5338/10, the respondent appeared and and the I.A. was posted for counter on 27.11.2010. Ext.P10 is the copy of the order in I.A.5338/10 in O.P.1513/08 on the file of the Family Court, Thrissur dated 29.1.2011. On 29.1.2011, the respondent/wife did not produce the child in the morning and she was directed to produce the child at 4 p.m., as the respondent/wife belongs to Thrissur and in spite of that direction also, the respondent/wife did not produce the child. THE petitioner/husband filed I.A.695/11 to issue a direction to the Station House Officer to arrest and produce the minor son before the court. As per the order in that I.A. dated 26.3.2011, direction was issued to the S.H.O. to produce the minor child before the court on 29.3.2011. Ext.P12 is the copy of that order. Ext.P13 is the copy of the order in I.A.5338/10 dated 7.5.2011, in which it is stated that the child was not produced as per order dated 26.3.2011 and the Station House Officer filed report and fresh warrant was issued to find out the child and produce him on or before 10.6.2011. In this Original Petition, the petitioner is challenging Exts.P10 and P12 orders.

(3.) SECTION 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act provides that for the purpose of enforcing the order for return of ward, the court can cause the arrest of the ward and can be delivered into the custody of the guardian. Under SECTION 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, the court has got inherent power in order to do justice between the parties and to prevent the abuse of process of court to give direction to the police to render all aid to the parties with regard to the implementation of the order passed by the court. As per order in I.A.5338/10, the Family Court directed the respondent/wife to produce the child before the court, which was not complied with by the petitioner herein, and therefore, the Family Court is justified in giving police help, in order to cause the production of the child. Therefore, we find no ground to interfere with Exts.P10 and P12 orders passed by the Family Court. As regards the second prayer in the Original Petition is concerned, we called for a report from the Family Court, to which the Family Court gave a report, which is extracted below :