Read Time: 06 minutes
Court had found Perry Kansagra's conduct “defiant” and “contumacious” who had played “fraud” in securing the custody of his son.
After adjourning the matter several times for granting an opportunity to a Kenyan citizen of Indian origin held guilty of contempt in a custody battle, the Supreme Court gave its verdict on sentencing. The Court had earlier convicted him for the civil and criminal contempt, but imposition of sentence had been reserved.
A bench a bench led by CJI U.U. Lalit and Justice P.S. Narsimha noting Perry Kansagra’s conduct throughout the proceedings before the Court, stated, “It had become evident that the contemnor has, in his well- calculated and deliberate scheme of things, given assurances and undertakings to mislead the Courts in India, including this Court, when he had no intention to comply or abide by any of his assurances. The following acts would demonstrate that they are not only willful disobedience of the judgment of this Court but are calculated to obstruct the administration of Justice and interfere with the due course of judicial proceedings. They had the clear effect of lowering the authority of the Court”.
“We have also noted that the contemnor never showed any remorse or tendered any apology for his conduct”, the bench further added.
The matter in dispute was concerning a transnational parental abduction case in inter-country marriages, where the contemnor (Perry Kansagra) was married to an Indian citizen, Smriti. The dispute reached before the Court through a guardianship petition, sought by contemnor, seeking legal guardianship of their child, Aditya. Therefore, considering the mechanism, Court directed Perry to get a “mirror order” from the concerned court in Nairobi, which would reflect the directions contained in the judgment. This was to facilitate the process of guardianship of the child, which was granted to him by the Top Court earlier. However, it was found that the Perry had suppressed and presented misconceived facts, and false statements before the Court. Pursuant to which the Court initiated suo motu proceedings against him for both civil and criminal contempt. Therefore, the Court recalled its order.
Court on Perry’s persuasion through a prayer that the order of the Court was without jurisdiction, stated, “He specifically prayed for declaration that there existed no valid mirror order and in the circumstances the orders passed by this Court are incapable of compliance and/or enforcement. This is the most egregious part of the contumacious acts committed by the contemnor. The statements made by him were false, and in fact, being fully aware that these were false statements, he proceeded to invoke the jurisdiction of the Kenya High Court to hold that Judgments and Orders passed by Indian Courts were unenforceable”.
Thus, the bench punished him for acts of deliberate and willful disobedience of the orders (civil contempt), for obstructing the administration of justice and lowering the authority of the Court (criminal contempt). Therefore sentenced him with imprisonment for 6 months each for civil and criminal contempt, with a total fine of Rs. 25 lakh, which the wife would receive.
Case at case title: In re Perry Kansagra
Please Login or Register
