Dismissed¶¶40

Mr Karan Chandrashekar v. Mrs Divya K C

Karnataka HC2 Feb 2026CCC/1400/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (Vibhu Bakhru CJ and C.M. Poonacha J, 02.02.2026) in CCC No.1400 of 2025: civil contempt for alleged breach of festival-custody direction dated 25.09.2025 in G&WC No.137/2023; filing a modification application or appeal is no excuse for non-compliance; accused directed to hand over minor children per the order till modified or set aside; contempt not initiated, complaint closed with caution against further violations.

What did the court decide?

No contempt proceedings initiated; complaint closed with observations — the accused is directed to comply strictly with the order dated 25.09.2025 (children to be sent to the father on festival/school holidays) till it is modified or set aside, and cautioned that a strict view would be taken of any further violation. ¶¶40

Mr Karan Chandrashekar Vs Mrs Divya K C — Child Custody and Guardianship | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against the accused for alleged wilful disobedience of the order dated 25.09.2025 passed in G&WC No.137/2023, which directed handover of custody of the minor children to the complainant during festivals. +1 more

¶¶18

Court's answer

The accused is directed to ensure that the minor children are sent to the father in terms of the order dated 25.09.2025 on all festival holidays/school holidays, until the order alleged to have been disobeyed is modified or set aside.

¶¶33

Ratio / Principle

Merely filing an application for modification of, or an appeal against, an order does not absolve a party from complying with it; till the order is modified, it must be strictly complied with.

¶¶33

Key takeaways

The Court is not inclined to initiate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 at this stage; the complaint is closed with the observation that the Court would take a strict view of any further violations.ratio¶¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Civil Contempt Petition No.1400 of 2025 alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 25.09.2025 in G&WC No.137/2023, whereby I.A.No.24 under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act read with Section 151 CPC was allowed in part and the respondent was directed to hand over custody of the minor children (Kavin Chandrashekar and Aanya Chandrashekar) to the petitioner-father during Diwali (10:00 AM to 7:00 PM) and other festivals (10:00 AM to 3:00 PM) when they fall on school holidays — Allegation that the children were not sent on Diwali and Dasara; accused stated children were sent for one day and a modification application was filed — Held: merely filing an application for modification or an appeal does not absolve a party from complying with an order; till the order is modified or set aside it must be strictly obeyed — accused directed to ensure the children are sent to the father as per the order dated 25.09.2025 on all festival/school holidays — Contempt proceedings not initiated at this stage; complaint closed with a caution that a strict view would be taken of any further violation. (Vibhu Bakhru, CJ; C.M. Poonacha, J)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:5873-DB CCC No. 1400 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶8

AND

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 1400 OF 2025

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MR KARAN CHANDRASHEKAR S/O A CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT UNIT K5, NO 480, 13TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE 560034,

¶12

…COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. K.B.S. MANIAN, ADVOCATE A/W SRI. AZHAR ALI FAROOQI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally SRI. AZHAR ALI FAROOQI, ADVOCATE) signed by NIRMALA AND: DEVI Location: MRS DIVYA K C HIGH COURT OF W/O KARAN CHANDRASHEKAR, KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT 161, 6TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, S.T BED LAYOUT, 1ST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560034, KARNATAKA

¶14

…ACCUSED

¶15

(BY SMT. PRATHIMA S K, ADVOCATE)

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:5873-DB CCC No. 1400 of 2025

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 10, 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971, BY THE COMPLAINANT, PRAYING TO INITIATE APPROPRIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR DELIBERATE AND WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE OF THE ORDER DATED 25.09.2025 PASSED IN G AND WC NO.137/2023 (ANNEXURE-A) AND AWARD MAXIMUM PUNISHMENT TO THE ACCUSED PERSON.

¶19

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶23

The complainant has filed the present complaint alleging

¶24

willful disobedience of an order dated 25.09.2025 passed in G&WC No.137/2023. The operative part of the order reads as under:

¶25

I.A.No.24 filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act read with Section 151 of CPC is hereby allowed in part.

¶26

Respondent is hereby directed to handover the custody of minor children Kavin Chandrashekar and Aanya Chandrashekar to the petitioner during Diwali festivals from 10-00 AM to 7-00 PM and on other festivals mentioned in this application from 10-00 AM to 3-00 PM every year till the disposal of this petition, only when said festivals fall on school holidays.

¶27

Petitioner is hereby directed to take care of the needs of the children in time, he shall not cause any

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:5873-DB CCC No. 1400 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

inconvenience to the children and not to give objectionable food, which is harmful to the health of the children, during the custody.

¶31

For hearing on IA Nos. 17, 18, and 20 to 23 as a last chance and finally by 31-10-2025.

¶32

The complainant alleges that the children were not sent to him from 10.00 am., to 7.00 pm., on Diwali and Dasara festivals.

¶33

Learned counsel for the accused states that the children were sent for one day during the said festivals but not for the entire duration. He also states than an application for modification of the order has been filed. It is well settled that merely filing an application for modification or an appeal against an order would not absolve the parties from complying with it. Till the order is modified, the accused is required strictly to comply with the order passed by the Court. Accordingly, the accused shall ensure that the children are sent to the father as mentioned in the order dated 25.09.2025 on all festival holidays/school holidays till the order, the disobedience of which is alleged, is modified or set aside.

¶34