IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 23RD AUGUST 2011 / 1ST BHADRA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 246 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN Crl.(MC) : 23366/2010 Dated 21/07/2010 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- HEMA JOSEPH, D/O. DR. K.T.XAVIER, FLAT NO.8-B, KATTIKARAN TOWERS, OFF, PROVIDENCE ROAD, KACHERIPADY P.O., KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.RADHIKA RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- JOSEPH AUGUSTINE, NO.7, PUSHPA NAGAR, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE SRI.ADEEP ANWAR THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Con.Case(C).No. 246 of 2011(S) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT: ANNEXURE 1 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 21/7/10 IN CRL.M.C. NO.2366/2010 /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Contempt Case (Civil) No. 246 OF 2011 and I.A. No. 511 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, C.J. I.A. No. 511 of 2011 is filed with the prayer as follows: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is most respectfully payed that this Honourable court may be pleased to permit the petitioner/respondent in the CCC No.246/2011 to go abroad for the purpose of continuing his employment, in the interest of justice.” 2. The Contempt Case is filed complaining non- compliance of the order of this Court in Crl.(MC) No.2366 of 2010. The abovementioned Crl.(MC) arose out of CC No.246/2009 in which the respondent herein is facing prosecution for an offence under Section 498A IPC. During the pendency of the said CC, the respondent obtained the permission of the Court to leave the country to pursue employment abroad. Challenging the permission so granted, Crl.(MC) No.2366 of 2010, came to be filed. COC No.246 of 2011 -:2:- 3. By an order dated 21.07.2010, a learned Judge of this Court while affirming the order of the lower court, permitted the respondent to go abroad to pursue his employment and imposed certain conditions on the respondent which are as follows: “i) The 2nd respondent is permitted to go abroad for a period of six months from today. ii) The 2nd respondent shall deposit by way of arrears of interim maintenance a sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) before the Family Court, Ernakulam in M.C. 53 of 2010 within two weeks from today and the said amount shall be permitted to be withdrawn by the petitioner. (It shall be open to the 2nd respondent to make direct payment to the petitioner and produce the necessary voucher before the Family Court). iii) The 2nd respondent shall continue to deposit before the Family Court, Ernakulam in the above M.C. case a sum of Rs. 4,000/- (Rupees four thousand only) per month towards interim future maintenance every month starting from 26th August 2010 onwards. The petitioner will be entitled to withdraw those amounts also as and when deposited. (Instead of deposit the 2nd respondent may also make direct payments and produce evidence of payment). iv) The petitioner shall execute a bond before the Court below for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount COC No.246 of 2011 -:3:- to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate undertaking to return from abroad on the expiry of seven months from today and also undertaking to deposit or pay the interim maintenance as directed in this order. v) The permission to go abroad will be valid and effective only if the petitioner complies with the above directions for depositing or paying the arrears of interim maintenance. In case the petitioner commits default in making the above deposit or payment, it shall be open to the Magistrate to obtain reports from the Family Court regarding the default and thereafter, issue proper process against the petitioner through his local Advocate for his premature appearance before the Court. In that event, the 2nd respondent will be liable for such action as the Magistrate and the Family Court may deem fit and proper. vi) The interim maintenance paid or deposited will be subject to final orders in M.C. 53 of 2009.” 4. The instant contempt case is filed complaining that the respondent herein willfully and deliberately violated condition Nos.1 and 3 extracted above. 5. As of today admittedly the abovementioned condition No.3 has been complied with for the period ending with October 2011, though there is a delay in making the COC No.246 of 2011 -:4:- payment of the amounts in terms of the said condition No.3. In view of the fact that the respondent is praying that he may be permitted to leave the country once again and in view of the fact that there was a delay in the payment of the monthly maintenance in terms of the abovementioned condition No.3, we thought it appropriate to direct the respondent to deposit an amount of `48,000/- to ensure the maintenance as ordered by the Family Court for the next 12 months, to which condition the respondent agreed and handed over a demand draft for an amount of `48,000/- to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the same was recorded by this Court on 22.08.2011. 6. Coming to the violation of condition No.1, i.e., the respondent was permitted to go abroad only for a period of seven months from the date of the order, but the respondent overstayed the abovementioned period, having regard to the totality of the circumstances and more particularly the respondent requires the necessary permission of the employer for leaving the country where he is working, we take a lenient view in the matter and believes that the violation of the COC No.246 of 2011 -:5:- condition imposed is not deliberate and wilful and permit the respondent to leave the country. In the circumstances, we do not see any reason to keep the contempt case pending. The same is accordingly closed. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge. ttb