On February 21, the Supreme Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate how a man, who was facing contempt proceedings, managed to travel to the United States despite having deposited his Indian passport with the Court.
The matter stems from an ongoing child custody dispute between a husband and wife. Contempt proceedings were initiated against the man after he failed to comply with the Court’s directive to bring the child back from the USA. The Court expressed concern over how he was able to leave the country without a valid passport and ordered a thorough investigation to determine any procedural lapses or violations that facilitated his departure.
A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Manmohan directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register a First Information Report (FIR) and conduct a thorough probe into the matter.
Earlier, on January 29, the Supreme Court had issued a non-bailable warrant against the man, instructing the Ministry of Home Affairs to take all necessary legal measures to ensure his arrest and bring him to justice. The Court emphasized the seriousness of the case, underscoring the need for strict action to prevent such violations of judicial authority in the future.
Today, Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj informed the Court that a report, along with CCTV footage from the airport, has been filed in a sealed cover. On this, Justice Dhulia asked: "How could this have been done? Tell us, what are you doing? What do you do in such cases?"
Nataraj replied: "He has to be brought back. We will have to register some FIR."
Dhulia responded that there is a separate wing in the MHA which deals with such cases. He said: "Were you not in touch with them to tell you what happened and what steps-A, B, C, D to be taken?"
Nataraj stated that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) would need to coordinate with its counterpart authorities in the United States to address the issue. He emphasized that initiating the process of extradition would be necessary to ensure the man's return to India. Additionally, he suggested that the Court may consider issuing a direction for the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) to facilitate further legal action in the case.
Justice Dhulia responded: "We will in any case direct registration of FIR. He could not have done it without assistance. What he probably did was, and if he has done it, then its going to be a big problem. When he deposited the passport, he must have applied for US citizenship. Meanwhile, what he deposited here was an Indian passport. He must have got a US passport. They [US Embassy] must have confirmed he has a US passport and for some reasons, they would have issued it. He must not have disclosed to US Embassy."
When the Court tried to find out if the man held a US passport, the Counsel for the man stated that he only held a green card and the travel documents were issued by the US Embassy. He added that the main issue here was the custody of the child and everything else could be dealt with later. On this, Justice Dhulia orally remarked: "Listen, you have complicated these matters. First, we will deal with this before we deal with anything else. Forget child custody and all. These are secondary issues. Right now, we will see to it that you are brought here. That is our first duty right now...Did you ever askk this Court, you want to go there? Had you asked, it's a child [custody matter] don't you think we would have given it to you. How can you play fraud on this Court?"
The matter was revisited by the Court at 12 PM, where it was revealed that "travel documents" had reportedly been issued to the man by the US Embassy. Senior Advocate Vipin Sanghi, representing the petitioner, alleged that the man had forged multiple documents, including his passport, to facilitate his escape. When the Court inquired whether the airport authorities had verified his passport before departure, Nataraj pointed out that CCTV footage showed the man arriving at the airport in a wheelchair, possibly to evade scrutiny.
Sanghi then provided a brief history of the case, highlighting that when the matter was initially brought before the Court, the father of the man had been directed to surrender his passport. Subsequently, the man appeared before the Court and offered to surrender his own passport, but only on the condition that his father's passport be released. Given these circumstances, Sanghi urged the Court to re-confiscate the father's passport and issue a Look-Out Circular (LOC) against him to prevent any further attempts at evasion.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court issued an order directing the CBI to conduct an investigation and initiate the process immediately, including registering an FIR as necessary. Additionally, while not formally recorded in the order, the Court orally instructed the contemnor’s counsel to ensure that the child is brought from the USA to be reunited with the mother in India. The matter is scheduled for further hearing in three weeks.
info@adhwaitha.com
