: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.189 OF 2007 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.61 OF 2007 AND FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.29 OF 2007 FROM M.J. PETITION NO.D-65 OF 2005 AND M.J. PETITION NO.D-66 OF 2005 Mohan Kumar Rayana ....Petitioner V/s. Komal Mohan Kumar Rayana ....Respondent Mr.Kevik Setalwad with Mr.Siddharth Srivastav i/b M/s.D.H. Law Associates for the Petitioner. Mr.Anand Grover with Ms.Firdaus Moosa i/b Mr.Prakash Mahadik Respondent. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 3RD JULY, 2008. P.C. : 1. The Respondent is the Petitioner’s husband. The Petitioner has alleged that the Respondent is guilty of contempt of the order of this Court dated 3.5.2007. By this order custody of the child was ordered to remain with the Respondent - mother and the Petitioner - father was granted access to the child during the vacations and on certain other terms and conditions. The Supreme Court by an order dated : 2 : 1.11.2007 disposed of the Civil Appeal Nos.5088-5097 of 2007 as follows :- "17. We, accordingly dispose of these appeals with the following directions :- i). Since the welfare of a minor child is involved, the High Court is requested to try and dispose of the pending appeals as expeditiously as possible, but preferably within three months from the date of communication of this order. ii). The appellant/father of the minor, will be entitled to have access to Anisha on weekends on Saturdays and Sundays and will be entitled, if the child is willing, to keep her with him on Saturday night. For the said purpose, the appellant shall receive the child from the respondent at 10.00 a.m. on Saturday from her residence at Bandra or from a mutually agreed upon venue and shall return the child to the respondent on Sunday by 2.00 p.m. In the event Anisha is unwilling to stay with the appellant overnight, the appellant will then make her over to the respondent on Saturday itself by 9.00 p.m.; in that case, the appellant will be entitled to take Anisha out on Sunday also between 9.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. iii). Both the appellant as well as the respondent must co-operate with each other in making the aforesaid arrangements work. The respondent shall not prevent the appellant from having access to Anisha in the manner indicated : 3 : above. Likewise, once Anisha is handed over to the appellant he too must honour the aforesaid arrangements and not keep Anisha with him beyond the time stipulated. In the event of either of the parties violating the aforesaid arrangement, the other party would be at liberty to pray for appropriate orders before the Bombay High Court in the pending appeals ; iv). The aforesaid arrangement is being made so that the appellant can have access to his minor daughter and also to ensure that the child’s education does not suffer in any way during the week. 18. The appeals are, accordingly, disposed of with the aforesaid modifications of the interim orders passed by the High Court and save as aforesaid, all the other interim directions shall continue to remain operative." 2. The matter appeared before me on a number of occasions. Attempts were made to ensure access of the child to the Petitioner. I do not intend dealing with the allegations and the contentions of either side regarding what transpired in this attempt at ensuring access of the child to the father during the pendency of this Petition. 3. In fairness to Mr.Grover, I must record that the Respondent initially agreed to comply with : 4 : paragraph 17 (ii) of the order either strictly namely by the Petitioner receiving the child from the Respondent from her residence as well as from a mutually agreed upon venue. Pursuant thereto by an order dated 26.6.2008, I recorded that the parties had agreed that the child will be escorted by the Respondent to the Children’s Complex in the Family Court where she would leave the child in the custody of the counsellor and thereafter leave the Family Court Complex. The parties further agreed that the Petitioner would thereafter be entitled to receive the child from the counsellor and return her to the Respondent at her residence by 7.00 p.m. the same day or by 2.00 p.m. the next day in accordance with paragraph 17(ii) of the order of the Supreme Court. The Registrar (Judicial) was directed to appoint an officer of this Court to remain present with the counsellor in the Children’s Complex. I was informed today that the order was complied with. 4. Mr.Setalwad stated that the child was agitated and refused to interact with the Petitioner. Unfortunately the Family Court complex was not made available for some reason from 12.00 noon. Understandably fifteen minutes with the child could never have been sufficient to either calm her down or : 5 : to convince her to go with the Petitioner. 5. Mr.Grover submitted that this incident has had an adverse effect on the child. He therefore, refused to consent any further in any manner regarding the mode of ensuring access of the child to the Petitioner. He insists that the mode must be strictly as per clause 17(ii) of the order of the Supreme Court namely at the Respondent’s residence and not even in the Family Court Complex. Mr.Setalwad on the other hand submits that to ensure access to the child atleast a few more attempts ought to be made at the Family Court centre which is suited to ensure access in such matters. 6. I am afraid, it is not open for this Court to do so. It is not for this Court to vary or modify the order of the Supreme Court. 7. For the same reason, namely that it is not open to this Court to vary or modify the order of the Supreme Court, I decline to consider Mr.Setalwad’s suggestion that a suitable mode/method be adopted for getting the child used to the Petitioner. He suggested sending the child to a Psychologist/Counsellor. : 6 : 8. I cannot help but express my appreciation also for the extremely responsible and considerate approach adopted by the Petitioner - father in the matter. Seeing the reaction of the child, he has not once forced her to go with him or exercised pressure on her in that regard. Indeed the suggestion to send the child to a counsellor was with a view not to upset the child by forcibly taking access pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court. 9. As the Respondent has not shown any indication of refusal to comply with the order of this Court as modified by the order of the Supreme Court, no action for contempt is called for. 10. The Contempt Petition is accordingly disposed of.