Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 890 (PNJ)

MARJEENA ALIAS MARJINA v. SOFAT ALI SON OF SABAR ALI AND OTHERS

COCP/1692/2025 · 2026-02-17

Nidhi Gupta

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN TH 210 Marjeena Sofat Ali CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU violation o predecesso <Marjeena whereby th reproduced COCP-1692-2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR COCP No.1692 o Date of decision jeena @ Merjina Versus AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI Mr. Amandeep Singh Jawandh for the petitioner. HI GUPTA J. (Oral) Present contempt petition tion of order dated 13.11.2024 (An ecessor Bench of this Court in CR rjeena alias Merjina vs. State of UT eby the petition was disposed of. The duced as below :- <The present pet petitioner by way of iss of Habeas Corpus seek namely Aisha, who is custody of respondent N 2. Respondent No.5 last date of hearing Mediation, wherein th and concerned Settleme is executed between the 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 1692 of 2025 (O & M) cision :-17.02.2026 &..Petitioner &..Respondent E NIDHI GUPTA wandha, Advocate ition has been filed alleging (Annexure P-1) passed by a CRWP-10884-2023 titled as of UT Chandigarh and others=, f. The order dated 13.11.2024 is petition has been filed by the f issuance of writ in the nature seeking release of her daughter is stated to be in the illegal ent No.5 (husband). o.5 made statement that on the ing matter was referred for n the matter has been settled tlement Deed dated 07.11.2024 the parties. It is further stated VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.19 09.19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-1692-2025 (O & M) that the terms and aforesaid settlement respondent No.5 and t disposed of in light of th 3. The petitioner, w person alongwith her c willing to get the custo who is aged about 13 y with her husband i.e. re 4. It appears that settled between the pa will meet on second Sat each month at a comm children. 5. The petitioner is minor daughter, aged studying in 8 class Secondary School, in th 6. From the perusa circumstances of the ca that petitioner has prim that her minor daughter in illegal custody o respondent No.5. In cas custody of said minor c she is at liberty to avai is available under the la 7. In light of the ab hereby disposed of in the parties are to rema dated 07.11.2024, whic parties during the media settlement deed is direc this petition.= 2 and conditions recorded in nt deed are acceptable to nd that the present petition be of the aforesaid settlement. er, who has also appeared in er counsel submits that she is custody of her minor daughter, 13 years and is presently living e. respondent No.5. that during mediation, it was e parties that both the parties Saturday and fourth Sunday of common place alongwith their er is claiming custody of her ged about 12/13 years, who is lass in Government Senior in the area of Chandigarh. rusal of the aforesaid facts and e case, this Court is of the view prima facie failed to establish ghter aged about 12/13 years is y of any person including case the petitioner is claiming or child being her mother, then avail the efficacious remedy as he law. e above, the present petition is f in aforesaid terms. However, emain bound by the settlement which was effected between the ediation proceedings. The said irected to be taken on record of VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.19 09.19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document present con 27.08.2025 not be issue the petition needful wi and in the directed to necessary s reveals tha time, learn fee and, co issued. sought time request ma opportunity steps for se Court has n of diligenc settled th extraordina COCP-1692-2025 (O & M) Vide order dated 20.5.2025, nt contempt petition was issued for 27 8.2025, it has been recorded that notic e issued for want of process fee. On th etitioner expressed regret for the laps ful within a period of two weeks. C in the interest of justice, time was gra ted to issue notices to the respondent sary steps, for the date fixed i.e. 17.02 Perusal of the latest office als that despite the aforesaid undertak , learned counsel for the petitioner fa nd, consequently, notices to the respo Today, learned counsel for ht time to deposit the process fee. This Court has given thoug est made. The record clearly reflects th rtunity was already granted to the p for service of the respondents. The un t has not been honoured. The petitione iligence in prosecuting the present co d that contempt jurisdiction, b ordinary in nature, cannot be permitt 3 .2025, notice of motion in the for 27.8.2025. In the order dated notices to the respondents could . On that date, learned counsel for he lapse and undertook to do the ks. Considering the undertaking as granted and the Registry was ndents on the petitioner9s taking . 17.02.2026. office report dated 03.02.2026 dertaking and grant of sufficient ner failed to deposit the process e respondents again could not be l for the petitioner has again thoughtful consideration to the lects that adequate and reasonable the petitioner to take necessary The undertaking given before this titioner has shown complete lack ent contempt petition. It is well on, being discretionary and ermitted to be invoked and kept VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.19 09.19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document pending at basic proce specific op approach o circumstan would unne further time for non-pr contempt other remed February Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo COCP-1692-2025 (O & M) ing at the convenience of a litigant procedural requirements. Repeated failure to deposit ific opportunity and undertaking, sh oach on the part of the petitioner. Gra mstances would amount to granting p d unnecessarily burden the judicial do In view of the above, no gro er time to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present cont prosecution. However, it is clarified that petition shall not preclude the p r remedy available to him in accordanc uary 17, 2026 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No 4 tigant who fails to comply with eposit the process fee, despite ng, shows casual and negligent er. Granting further time in such nting premium to negligence and ial docket. no ground is made out to grant t contempt petition is dismissed at dismissal of the present the petitioner from availing any ordance with law, if so advised. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.02.19 09.19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document