Mrs. Neetu Kainth & Another ... vs Parmjit Singh Sagar
2021 Latest Caselaw 282 UK

                                                        (Reserved judgment)

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                  Writ Petition (CRL) No.1849 of 2018

       Mrs. Neetu Kainth & another                        ........Petitioners

                                   Versus

       Parmjit Singh Sagar                             ........Respondents


Present: Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Lalit Sharma,
         Advocate for the petitioners.
         Mr. V.K. Kohli, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Kanti Ram Sharma,
         Advocate, for the respondent.


Hon'ble Lok Pal Singh, J.

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned orders dated 09.05.2018, 06.09.2018 and 11.09.2018 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.426 of 2017 " Neetu Kainth Vs. Parmjit Singh Sagar".

2. The facts leadings to the present case are that the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun vide order dated 09.05.2018, had directed petitioner no.1 to remain present along with her son Master Parneet Singh Sagar, so the parties be permitted to meet Master Parneet Singh Sagar. Again, the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun vide order dated 06.09.2018 had directed the petitioner no.1 to comply with the order dated 09.05.2018. The Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun vide order dated 11.09.2018 has observed in his order that in spite of the orders, petitioner no.1 has not brought her son and rejected the application.

3. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.

4. It is an admitted case of the parties that Master Parneet Singh Sagar is minor aged about 9 years is living with his mother, namely, Smt. Neetu Kainth.

5. On several occasions, the Court below has passed orders directing petitioner no.1 to produce the son, namely, Master Parneet Singh Sagar, so that parties may be permitted to meet Master Parneet Singh Sagar, but these orders have not been complied with by the petitioner no.1 and has challenged the said orders in the present writ petition.

6. In view of this Court, on one hand, petitioner no. 1 is seeking maintenance from the respondent/ husband under Section 125 of CrPC, and on the other hand she herself is not obeying the orders passed by the Courts below.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner no. 1 herself is not obeying the orders passed by the courts below, the petitioners fail to make out a case of any interference from this Court.

8. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed. Interim order dated 04.10.2018 is hereby vacated.

(Lok Pal Singh, J.) 25.01.2021 Nitesh/