- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6080-DB CCC No. 247 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.247 OF 2022 BETWEEN: MEHRAJ FATHIMA D/O. MIRZA HUMAYUN ALI AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3/1, ARAB LANE B. STREET, RICHMOND TOWN BENGALURU - 560 025. …COMPLAINANT (BY SRI HASAN MAGADI, ADVOCATE, FOR SRI NAVEED AHMED) AND: MR. ZAHID ALI TAQI S/O. HAJI MOHAMMED TAQI AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.24, RAJA LAKSHMINAGAR 2ND CROSS, PALLIKARANAI CHENNAI - 600 100. …ACCUSED * * * THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE CONTEMPT COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED IN NOT COMPLYING SPECIFIC DIRECTION OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P. NO.10 OF 2019 (GM-FC) DATED 09.09.2019 AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6080-DB CCC No. 247 of 2022 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR) This contempt proceedings has been initiated against the accused/husband for non-compliance of the specific direction issued by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.10 of 2019 (GM-FC) dated 9-9-2019, wherein the accused was directed to pay the educational expenses of the minor child during the pendency of the proceedings before the Magistrate. 2. Further, the proceedings in Criminal Miscellaneous No.146 of 2016 before the Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court-I, Mayohall, Bengaluru, is partly allowed on 30-3-2022. 3. Sri Hasan Magadi, learned counsel representing Sri Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel for the complainant, is physically present and submits that notice is yet to be served upon the accused. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6080-DB CCC No. 247 of 2022 4. This Court observes that this contempt petition has been filed after lapse of two years and six months for seeking implementation of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 5. Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short, 'Act') reads as under: "20. Limitation for actions for contempt.- No court shall initiate any proceedings of contempt, either on its own motion or otherwise, after the expiry of a period of one year from the date on which the contempt is alleged to have been committed." 6. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. TIRUPATHI RAO v. M. LINGAMAIAH AND OTHERS reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1764, at paragraph No.53, has observed as under: "53. Reverting to the point of limitation, even in case of a petition disclosing facts constituting contempt, which is civil in nature, the petitioner cannot choose a time convenient to him to approach the Court. The statute refers to a specific time limit of one year from the date of alleged contempt for proceedings to be initiated; meaning thereby, as laid down in Pallav - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6080-DB CCC No. 247 of 2022 Sheth (supra), that the action should be brought within a year, and not beyond, irrespective of when the proceedings to punish for contempt are actually initiated by the high court." Therefore, keeping in view Section 20 of the Act and so also, the reliance of the Hon'ble Apex Court stated supra, there is no substance to consider this contempt petition. Consequently, this contempt petition is hereby dropped. Sd/- (K.SOMASHEKAR) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE KVK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1