MANINDER KAUR Vs. GURINDER SINGH DHILLON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act (for short 'the Act'), has been filed with the averments that on 11.10.1999, the parties solemnized their marriage according to Sikh rites and a female child, namely, Tanvi was born out of the wedlock, who is living with the petitioner.

(2.) THE respondent is a citizen of Germany and petitioner cohabited with the respondent when he was in India and whenever he used to come to India. The respondent went to Germany after leaving the petitioner in lurch. The petitioner was harassed and maltreated by the relatives of the respondent. An FIR No. 272. Dated 24.9.2003 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 498-A, 376, 120-B IPC, was registered at Police Station Civil Line, Patiala, at the instance of the petitioner against the respondent, his father Dalip Singh; Simarnjit Kaur (sister-in-law); Raspinder Singh (brother-in-law) and Baldev Singh (Devar). The respondent was declared as a Proclaimed Offender and was arrested at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, but subsequently enlarged on bail by the competent Court. Due to intervention of the respectables and friends, a compromise was arrived at between the parties and a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was filed on 24.1.2006. The statements of the parties were recorded on 24.2.2006. After the recording of the statements, the respondent filed a petition for quashing. of the FIR, which was quashed by this Court vide order dated 17.3.2006. The respondent made a statement before this Court that he shall appear before the learned trial Court on 29.5.2005 to make necessary statement for divorce by mutual consent. The statements of the parties were recorded on 29.5.2006 but before the decree for divorce could be passed, the respondents moved an application on 14.8.2006, a copy attached as Annexure P.10, to withdraw his consent for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. In view of the said. statement, the petition for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent was dismissed.

(3.) NOTICE of the present petition on behalf of the respondent was accepted by Shri S.S. Chatrath, Advocate, in Court on 24.5.2007. It may be noticed that the respondent also filed a petition for initiating contempt proceedings against the present petitioner. On 15.5.2007, the learned counsel for the respondent sought sometime to file reply to the petition. The case was adjourned to 10.7.2007 and the respondent was directed to remain present in the Court on the date fixed. The respondent did not appear before this Court on 10.7.2007, 6.8.2007 and 20.8.2007. It was on 24.9.2007, the respondent came present and case was taken up for hearing in pre-lunch session. The case was ordered to be taken up after lunch but the respondent did not come present in the court, whereupon the following order was passed on the said date :