$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 1474/2025 & CM APPL. 78769/2025 RITURAJ SHUKLA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar and Mr.

Anand C., Advocates.

versus LYDIA MONICA JOHN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mihir Samson, Ms. Sawari Sodhi, Ms Tavleen Kaur Saluja and Mr.

Pradip Kumar Singh, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 12.12.2025

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition under Sections 10/12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeks following prayers:-

“a. Initiate appropriate proceedings for civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the Respondent for her wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 28.08.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in MAT.APP. (FC) Nos. 119/2024 and 122/2024, whereby structured visitation rights were granted to the Petitioners in respect of the two minor daughters of Petitioner No. 1 and the Respondent;

b. Summon the Respondent and require her to show cause as to why she should not be held guilty of civil contempt under Section 2(b) read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for the repeated, continued, and contumacious violation of the said visitation directions stipulated by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 28.08.2024 in MAT.APP. (FC) Nos. 119/2024 and 122/2024;

c. Punish the Respondent for contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for wilfully disobeying order dated 28.08.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in MAT. APP. (FC.) 119/2024 and 122/2024;

d. Issue appropriate coercive directions compelling the Respondent to purge the contempt by strict, time-bound compliance with this Hon’ble Court’s orders, and to ensure uninterrupted and meaningful visitation of the Petitioners with the minor daughters, without preconditions or interference, including but not limited to:

i. Direct the Respondent to compensate for lost access during the winter and summer vacation of 2025 totalling 14 days, besides the loss of regular monthly visits totalling to 6 days and visitation on New Years Day, including in terms of the proposal set forth hereinabove (Paragraph No. 62)

ii. Direct the Respondent to permit the Petitioner No. 2 and Petitioner No. 3 to log in to video calls with the children from separate devices;

iii. Direct the Respondent to permit the Petitioner access to the school portal of Ms. Prakriti and daughters’ school email id login credentials so that the Petitioner can attend the PTMs.

iv. Direct the Respondent not to keep the video of the children off during the video calls directed by this Hon’ble Court.

v. Direct the Respondent not to initiate video calls from public places.

e. Impose exemplary costs upon the Respondent to deter frivolous obstruction and abuse of legal process in the future and to compensate the Petitioner for the legal and emotional injury suffered due to the denial of access;

f. Pass such further or other order(s), direction(s), or relief(s) as may be deemed just, fit and proper in the interest of justice, equity, and in furtherance of the welfare of the minor children.”

3. In pursuance of the orders dated 10.07.2025 and 26.07.2025 passed by learned Family Court, the petitioner has been given visitation rights and in view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press the present petition at this stage and seeks liberty to pursue the remedies as permissible in law before the learned Family Court for compensatory visitation.

4. Leave and liberty granted.

5. The present petition is disposed of as not pressed with liberty as prayed for.

6. Needless to state that on an application moved by the petitioner, learned Family Court shall decide the same in accordance with law. 7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

AMIT SHARMA, J DECEMBER 12, 2025/sn