IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR &

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR FRIDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1946 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1953 OF 2024 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED IN OP (FC) NO.112 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

MUNEER P P AGED 34 YEARS RESIDING AT BAITHUL HAMAD HOUSE, PAKKAYIL POST, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER NABEESA W/O MOIDU AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT BAITHUL HAMD HOUSE, PAKKAYIL, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KERALA STATE PIN 673 101 BY ADVS.

ARUNKUMAR P.

ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL NADEEM MOHAMMED V.K RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

SHAMEEMA C K AGED 30 YEARS KANHIRATHINKAL HOUSE, ANDONA, THAMARASSERY TALUK, THAMARASSERY PO, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN

673 573 , REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MUHAMMED ASHARAF S/O RAMLA V, RESIDING AT KANHIRATHINKAL HOUSE, PARAPPANPOYIL PO, THAMARASSERY, RAROTH,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KERALA STATE. PIN 673 573 BY ADV.K.M.FIROZ THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

P.B.SURESH KUMAR & C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, JJ.

-----------------------------------------------

Contempt Case (C) No.1953 of 2024 -----------------------------------------------

Dated this the 25^th day of October, 2024 J U D G M E N T In a proceedings instituted under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 before the Family Court for the custody of a minor child by his father, the Family Court directed the mother of the child to surrender the passport of the child so as to prevent the mother from taking the child abroad. After surrendering the passport, the mother of the child preferred an application for the release of the passport of the child on the ground that she intends to take the child abroad where she secured an employment. The said application was dismissed by the Family Court. The order passed by the Family Court in this connection was challenged by the mother of the child in O.P.

(FC) No.112 of 2024 before this Court, and in terms of an order passed on consensus, this Court directed the Family Court to release the passport of the child to the mother so as to enable the mother to take the child abroad and to enable the father of the child who is also working in the same place to exercise his visitation rights. In the light of the said order, the child was taken abroad. After sometime, the mother sent back the child to India and thereby deprived the visitation rights of the father. The above contempt case is filed alleging that the said conduct of the mother of the child would amount to wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in O.P.(FC) No.112 of 2024.

2. When this matter was taken up, the learned counsel for the respondent mother submitted that it is since the mother of the child could not sustain herself with the child in the place of her employment, she had no option but to send back the child, and she does not propose to take the child to her place of employment and that the father can exercise his visitation rights in India. It was also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent mother that the passport of the child has been surrendered before the family court on 26.09.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent mother that the passport of the child has already been submitted before the family court.

3. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent mother, it can be seen that the status quo as on the date of the order passed in O.P.(FC) No.112 of 2024 has now been restored. Inasmuch as the respondent has forfeited the benefit of the order passed by this Court, the contempt case can only be closed and we do so.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

Sd/-

C.PRATHEEP KUMAR, JUDGE.

Mn APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1953/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGME