Kaushik Shaw Vs Sulagna Mukherjee — Contempt of Court | Calcutta HC (2026)

Kaushik Shaw Vs Sulagna Mukherjee — Contempt of Court | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; CPAN/1621/2025 along with connected application disposed of without any order as to costs; parties at liberty to avail their remedies before the appropriate forum.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent (alleged contemnor) violated the order dated December 10, 2024 passed in Complaint Case No.1146 of 2023 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, warranting interference and invocation of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 / Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

Court's answer

In view of the subsequent order dated June 11, 2026, which was obtained by the petitioner himself in a proceeding filed by him and which is elaborate and regulates his visitation rights, the court is not minded to interfere any further in the contempt petition.

Ratio / Principle

The court is not minded to invoke the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 or Article 215 of the Constitution of India, in view of the subsequent development.

Key takeaways

The court makes no comment with regard to the conduct of the parties.obiter¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (CPAN 1621 of 2025 in C. Case No.1146/2023) alleging violation of the order dated December 10, 2024 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, whereby the respondent was directed to comply with the order dated July 31, 2020 of the Metropolitan Magistrate (Traffic Court VI), Bengaluru regulating modalities of child visits between the spouses. The respondent contended that the Bengaluru order stood modified by the Karnataka High Court. Pending the petition, the petitioner himself obtained a subsequent, elaborate order dated June 11, 2026 in Act VIII Case No.154 of 2023 (Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track 8th Court, Alipore) regulating his visitation rights vis-a-vis the child. Held: in view of that subsequent order, the court was not minded to interfere further, nor to invoke the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 or Article 215 of the Constitution of India; no comment was made on the conduct of the parties. Petition disposed of without any order as to costs, with liberty to the parties to avail remedies before the appropriate forum.

30.06.2026

Item No.4 Court No.37 CHC

In The High Court at Calcutta Special Civil Jurisdiction Appellate Side

CPAN 1621 of 2025 In C. Case No.1146/2023 IA NO: CAN/1/2025

Kaushik Shaw Vs.

Smt. Sulagna Mukherjee

Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, Advocate

Mr. Washim Akthir Dafadar, Advocate

…for the petitioner

Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty, Advocate Mr. Shashanka Shekhar Saha, Advocate

….for the alleged contemnor

Petitioner complains of violation of order dated December 10, 2024 passed in Complaint Case No.1146 of 2023 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Alipore.

By the order dated December 10, 2024, the learned Judge, directed the respondent herein to comply with the order dated July 31, 2020 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Traffic Court VI), Bengaluru.

By the order dated July 31, 2020, learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Traffic Court VI), Bengaluru regulated the modalities of the child visits between the husband and wife.

There are matrimonial disputes between the petitioner and the respondent. There is a child born out of the wedlock of the petitioner and the respondent. The

2

child is presently in Kolkata in the custody of the respondent.

It is contended on behalf of the respondent that, order dated July 31, 2020 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Traffic Court VI), Bengaluru was modified by the Karnataka High Court.

Be that as it may, we are informed today that, there is a subsequent order dated June 11, 2026 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track 8^th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in Act VIII Case No.154 of 2023.

The order dated June 11, 2026 is elaborate and it regulates the visitation rights of the petitioner vis-à-vis the child.

The petitioner before us obtained the subsequent order dated June 11, 2026 in the proceeding filed by him.

In view of the subsequent order dated June 11, 2026 which was obtained by the petitioner in a proceeding filed by him and in view of the fact that the subsequent order is elaborate and regulates the visitation rights of the petitioner, we are not minded to interfere any further in this contempt petition.

We are not minded to invoke the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 or Article 215 of the Constitution of India, in view of the subsequent development as noted above.

3

We however, make no comment with regard to the conduct of the parties.

CPAN/1621/2025 along with connected application

are disposed of without any order as to costs.

Parties are at liberty to avail their remedies before the

appropriate forum.

(Debangsu Basak, J.)

(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)

CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY

Digitally signed by CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Date: 2026.06.30 18:06:53 +05'30'