Dismissed

Ravishek Dixit v. Lakshmi and Another

Allahabad HC2 Sept 2024CAPL/3482/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a contempt application filed by a father seeking punishment against the mother. The court found that despite a permission to meet his daughter, the applicant did not plead that a visit was refused on the designated date, and other prayers were not fit for contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The contempt application was dismissed with the applicant told to pursue his case in the Family Court.

Ravishek Dixit vs Lakshmi and Another — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 17

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3482 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Ravishek Dixit Opposite Party :- Lakshmi And Another Counsel for Applicant :- In Person

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Heard applicant who is present in person through virtual hearing.

¶6

The present contempt application is filed with the prayer to punish the opposite party no.1 for committing contempt of order of the writ court dated 2.4.2024 passed in Special Appeal No.27 of 2023 'Ravishek Dixit & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors'.

¶7

Applicant submits that despite undertaking given by respondent no.1 she is not allowing him to meet his child and threat is also given by the respondent no.1, therefore, security may also be provided. He further submits that Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No.435 of 2022 was filed by him for getting his minor infant daughter but the same was rejected on 3.1.2023, then Special Appeal No.27 of 2023 was filed, which was disposed of on 2.4.2024 and on the consent of the respondent no.1, he was permitted to visit the child for one hour. He also submits that he was fallen ill in July, 2024, then request was made for re-scheduling the visiting time, as a result, it was rescheduled on 9.7.2024 on the consent of respondent no.1 but the child was not brought by the respondent no.1 by saying that she is not being well while she attending the hearing of the divorce case in Lucknow.

¶8

It is evident from the order dated 2.4.2024 passed in Special Appeal that applicant was permitted to meet his infant daughter at the mediation center in the District Court campus once in a month on the first of every month but there is no pleading that on first of month he visit and visitation was not allowed. It is also evident that other prayers are for extension of visitation time and police protection but all these things cannot be adjudicated in the contempt proceedings, in such circumstances, this Court is of the view that

¶9

no contempt is made out, accordingly, the same is hereby, dismissed .

¶10

However, it is open to the applicant to pursue his case, which is pending before the family court, in accordance with the law.

¶11

Order Date :- 2.9.2024 Gaurav/-

¶12

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravishek Dixit v. Lakshmi and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravishek Dixit v. Lakshmi and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vimla Arora Vs Shri Anupam Gupta, Managing Director, U.P. Forest Corporation, Lko.

Upendra Mani Mishra and Others Vs Dr. M.K.S. Sundaram, Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Basic Education Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Ram Surat Vishwakarma Vs Sri Ram Khelawan, Nayab Tehsildar, Tahsil Bikapur Dist. Ayodhya

Ravishek Dixit Vs Lakshmi and Another

Chandra Dev Yadav vs U.P. Cooperative Institutional Service Board. Lko. Thru. Its Secy. and 5 Others

Avadhesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another