He May Have Lost Control Over Son’s Custody: Delhi HC Discharges Man Who Allegedly Used Abusive Language In Family Court, Imposes ₹25k Cost

The Delhi High Court discharged a man who allegedly used abusive language in the Family Court out of anger over separation from his son in the custody case.

The Court was deciding a contempt case arising out of an order of the Family Court by which a reference was made to the High Court under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

A Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma said, “There can be no doubt that a litigant cannot be allowed to indulge in contemptuous conduct against a Court. However, a perusal of the affidavit filed shows that the said conduct occurred at a time when the son of the Contemnor was being separated from him. Such moments could be traumatic and emotional moments for a father that it is believable that he may have lost control and misbehaved. The contemnor clearly did not intend to cause disrespect or impede the administration of justice.”

Advocate Madhav Khurana was appointed as Amicus Curiae by the Court, Advocate Teeksh Singhal represented the petitioner, and Advocate Anubhav Mehrotra represented the respondent.

Brief Facts -

The allegations against the respondent/contemnor were that, he used abusive language in the Family Court and upon the Court asking him and his counsel to appear before the Court, they chose not to appear and walked away. On July 31, 2024, the reference was listed before the High Court and on that day, show cause notice as to why contempt action ought not to be initiated, was issued to the contemnor. The Amicus Curiae submitted that the contemnor was involved in a matrimonial dispute with his wife and he had tendered an unconditional apology for his conduct before the Family Court.

He, however, also added that the Family Court could have at best constituted a reference and referred the matter to the High Court but it could not have issued show cause notice and come to any conclusion that the contemnor had in fact committed contempt. The counsel for the contemnor handed over a final settlement agreement wherein the disputes between the contemnor and his wife were resolved. It was submitted that in terms of the settlement, the custody of the minor son was with the father (contemnor), subject to various conditions.

The High Court after hearing submissions of the counsel, observed, “Having regard to the fact that the conduct of the Contemnor though completely unbecoming, appears to have taken place in a circumstance of frustration and in the midst of a matrimonial spat with his wife where his son’s custody was also involved, this Court is of the opinion that the Contemnor may not have had any intention to show disrespect to the Court. The Contemnor, has admitted that in a moment of anger and frustration, had misbehaved with the ld. Family Court.”

The Court noted that the power of contempt, specifically criminal contempt, ought to be exercised sparingly as the Court is not personally involved in such matters and can be compassionate and empathetic to such circumstances, especially when the contemnor is expressing remorse.

“Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances, this Court accepts the apology of the Contemnor subject to the condition that the Contemnor shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, within 1 week”, it further directed.

Accordingly, the High Court disposed of the contempt case, accepted the apology of the contemnor, and discharged him.

Cause Title- Court on its own motion v. Abhinav Kathuria (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:7013-DB)

Click here to read/download the Judgment