The Court of Appeal set April 5 next year for an open-court hearing of M Indira Gandhi’s appeal to commence contempt proceedings over police’s alleged failure to recover her daughter taken by her former husband who is a Muslim convert, declaring the matter as a public interest.
A three-person Court of Appeal bench chaired by Kamaludin Md Said said this when rescheduling today’s initially fixed online hearing of the kindergarten teacher’s appeal linked to an incident where Muhammad Riduan Abdullah took away Prasana Diksa, now aged 15.
Earlier today, Kamaludin informed lawyers for Indira and Riduan that the bench was not able to read the parties’ written reply submissions as the online system locked out attempts to file the documents.
Kamaludin noted that the system lockout was due to counsel not filing in time, and that the subsequent physical filing was made later and the bench was unable to read these submissions before today’s scheduled hearing.
“This is a public interest case and we need the benefit of reading your replies. We reschedule this hearing to open court (physical proceedings at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya). The issue is quite important.
“As this is a public interest case, the court directs that this appeal be heard in open court. Reporters are interested to listen (follow the appeal),” Kamaludin said on behalf of other bench members - Hashim Hamzah and Azmi Ariffin.
Counsel Rajesh Nagarajan is acting for Indira, 48. Riduan is represented by lawyer Mankiranjit Kaur.
On Aug 5 last year, the Ipoh High Court dismissed Indira’s leave application to start proceedings against the inspector-general of police and the police for contempt of court over purported failure to execute an order to arrest Riduan and recover her daughter.
During a press conference after the court ruling then, Indira expressed her disappointment with the outcome of the leave application.
“It was a bit disappointing, but we already expected this is what the judge would be giving us.
“Everyone knows the case has been dragging on without any solution which is very disappointing.
“We will definitely be taking this case to the Court of Appeal,” she said.
Incidentally, before the Kuala Lumpur High Court, Indira had a separate lawsuit against the police over the authorities’ alleged failure to track down and arrest Riduan and recover Prasana from him.
Abducted by father
Prasana was an infant when her father Riduan, previously named K Pathmanathan, reportedly took her away in 2009 after converting to Islam.
Riduan and Indira were later locked in a protracted interfaith custody battle after he unilaterally converted Prasana and their two other children to Islam.
In 2014, the Ipoh High Court ordered the police to retrieve Prasana from her father. In 2016, the Federal Court ordered the IGP to arrest Riduan.
In January 2018, the Federal Court unanimously ruled that unilateral conversions of children were unlawful as such decisions need permission from both parents.
The court also issued an arrest warrant for Riduan.
According to Indira's lawsuit, the IGP allegedly failed to abide by two orders of the Ipoh High Court issued on May 30, 2014.
The first order was a committal order for Riduan to be jailed for failing to return Prasana to Indira. The second one was a recovery order for the police and the court bailiff to retrieve Prasana from Riduan and return her to Indira.
Indira claimed that the IGP had committed a tort of nonfeasance in public office by failing to arrest Riduan and recover Prasana.
The plaintiff is seeking declarations that the IGP has committed a tort of nonfeasance in public office and that the other three defendants are vicariously liable for the first defendant’s (IGP’s) tort of nonfeasance.
Indira is also seeking general, aggravated, and exemplary damages, interest, costs and any other order deemed fit by the court. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.