The burden of proof in contempt proceedings is beyond reasonable doubt, requiring clear evidence of the alleged breaches.

[1] This is an application via Summon-In- Chamber (Encl 26) ("the application") filed by the Petitioner Husband-("PH") seeking a committal order against the Respondent Wife ("RW") with a view for her to be committed to prison for alleged failure to comply with the interim order dated 6th June 2016 ("the said order") granted by this Court, until she purges her contempt and cost of RM10,000 to be paid to the PH within seven days from the date of the order thereof.

[2] The relevant cause papers and written submissions, are as follows:

(a) Encl 26: The application dated 9th September 2016;

(b) Encl 27: The PH's affidavit in support affirmed by Lee Chang Yong on 8th September 2016;

(c) Encl 53: The RW's affidavit in reply affirmed by Teng Wai Yee on 10th October 2016;

(d) Encl 54: Affidavit in support of RW's affidavit, affirmed by Suhana Khairun Ali on 25th October 2016;

(e) Encl 120: PH's written submission;

(f) Encl 122: RW's petitioner's written submission.

(g) Encl 123: PH's written submission in reply; and

(h) Encl 122: RW's reply written submission in reply.

[3] This application was heard before me on 6th September 2017 and after perusing the cause papers filed, respective written submissions of the parties, I dismissed the said application with no order as to cost. Dissatisfied, the PH had filed this appeal and my reasons are as follows:

Brief Facts

[4] The brief facts disclosed from the cause papers are as follows:

(a) The PH and RW were legally married on 23rd December 2006 and were blessed with two children ("the said children"), a girl name Lee Yi Rou ("the said girl" - "Rou") born on 23rd March 2008 (9+ years) and a boy name Lee Xin Jie ("the said boy" - "Jie") born on 23rd September 2012 (5+ years).

(b) On 17th December 2015, the parties presented a joint petition for divorce resulting in the granting of a Decree Nisi on 21st January 2016 [(Encl 2) - (Exh C)]. Several interim orders were also subsequently issued by this Court on 29th March 2016.

(c) It was subsequently discovered that the RW (and the children) had apparently converted to the Islamic faith on 29th December 2015 after the filing of the joint petition and before the granting of the Decree Nisi on the said 29th March 2016. Before the decree could be made absolute, the PH filed an application to set aside the decree grounded on that conversion by the RW which was duly granted by this Court.

(d) On 6th June 2016, the learned Judicial Commissioner then, had granted an ad-interim order by consent [(Lampiran A - (Encl 24)] and it is this said interim order the PH alleged that the RW had failed to comply.

(e) Briefly, the PH alleges that the RW had failed to comply with the said interim order when she (allegedly) brought the said children to the mosque, caused the said daughter to fast during the month of Ramadhan, failed to give access to the PH to communicate with the said children at the appointed time, and handing over of the care of the said children to a 3rd party when the RW was unable to care for them.

(f) On 15th August 2016, the PH filed an application for leave for committal (Encl 15) against the RW which was granted by this Court on 30th August 2016. On 9th September 2016, PH filed this application for committal against the RW (Encl 26).

(g) I reproduced the charges against the RW as follows:

"Responden lsteri tidak mematuhi Perenggan 2(b) dan 3 Perintah tersebut:-

Tuduhan Pertama (1)

1. Responden lsteri telah membawa Lee Yi Rou (Rou) dan Lee Xin Ji