The delay in enforcing an attachment order for maintenance does not constitute contempt of court when disciplinary action is initiated against responsible parties.

ORDER :

1. This contempt petition is filed to punish the respondent for the contempt of Court committed by him by his wilful disobedience to the order of the learned Judge, Family Court, Tirunelveli, in Salary Attachment Warrant (Distrain Warrant for Arrears of Maintenance) dated 07.07.2023 read with order in communication D.No.123/2023 dated 07.07.2023.

2. The case of the first petitioner is that:-

She got married to one Kannan @ Thangasamy on 27.01.2005 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. A son was born to them on 19.10.2005. Her husband and his family members caused cruelty by demanding dowry and driven her out from the matrimonial home. In this connection, she lodged a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli. During the enquiry, her husband Kannan promised to take her back, but failed to keep his promise. Hence, a petition for maintenance for herself and her minor child, was filed before the Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli, under Section 125 Cr.P.C as M.C.No: 4/2006, later it was transferred to Family Court, Thirunelveli and renumbered as M.C.No.70/2014. The Family Court, taking into consideration the counter filed by Kannan, the respondent who denied the paternity of the child, but later found to be a false defence after DNA test and the long pendency of the petition for nearly 10 years, vide its order dated 30.03.2015, ordered maintenance of Rs.5000/- each payable from the date of filing the maintenance petition ie., 13.02.2006.

3. The first petitioner stating that a criminal case was registered against her husband and his relatives which was taken cognizance by the Mahila Court, Thirunelveli in C.C.No.545 of 2013 and it ended in their conviction. When the appeal in C.A.No.32 of 2016 was pending, her husband promised to pay the arrears of maintainance as per the order passed in M.C.No.70 of 2014. Hence, she consented for compromise. However, he failed to pay the arrears as well as the current maintenance. Hence, she has filed an application in Crl.M.P.No.199 of 2023 under Section 128 of Cr.P.C claiming Rs.20,60,000/- towards arrears of maintenance. In the said application, the Family Court, Tirunelveli, has issued Salary attachment warrant addressed to the Superintendent of Prison, Palayamkottai, under whom Kannan is working as a Police Constable.

4. Contempt petition is against Senthamaraikannan, the Superintendent of Prision,Palayamkottai, alleging even after one year the warrant of attachment of salary issued by the Court on 07.07.2023 wilfully disobeyed by not executed.

5. When the petition came up for consideration on 23.01.2026, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that there is no wilful disobedience of the salary attachment order. For not executing the Court order, departmental action initiated against the persons responsible.

6. The order of attachment of salary is effected from November 2025 vide proceedings of the Central Prison Superintendeent, Palayamkottai, dated 13.10.2025.

7. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that, the reason given for belated execution of the warrant of attachment of Salary is not tenable. The contemnor wantonly to assist his subordinate, disobeyed the Court order till filing of the contempt petition. The delay in executing the attachment order is an act of contempt.

8. Heard the