Lawyers for M. Indira Gandhi, who is embroiled in a custody battle with her ex-husband, will argue before a High Court judge tomorrow that the Inspector-General of Police had breached his duty when he refused to enforce two court orders issued on May 30.
Lawyer Aston Paiva, who is a member of Indira's legal team, said the court could compel Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar to arrest Muhammad Riduan Abdullah and hand over Prasana Diksa to Indira.
Paiva said Khalid had a legal duty under the Police Act to enforce orders by a competent court.
A government lawyer is also expected to submit before judge Lee Swee Seng the reasons and circumstances that led police not to execute the orders.
If the judge is satisfied with the IGP's explanation, the police need not enforce the committal and recovery orders issued on May 30 this year.
On the other hand, if Lee is dissatisfied with the queries, he could still give time to the police to enforce the orders.
It is unclear, however, if a civil servant can be punished for refusing to carry out a legal duty as there is no past precedent.
A mandamus order is taken to compel a civil servant to perform or stop him from doing a certain act.
Paiva said Indira's mandamus application had now become stronger following the Court of Appeal's decision yesterday to strike out Riduan's appeal against his contempt of court for refusing to hand over Prasana Diksa.
A three-man bench led by Datuk Balia Yusof Wahi yesterday said the court would not hear a contemptor who has shown disrepect to court orders.
Lawyer M. Kula Segaran, who is representing Indira, said his client would drop her suit if police delivered Prasana Diksa to her.
"The IGP and his men still have time to locate Prasana Diksa and arrest the father (Riduan) and put him in a civil prison," he told reporters yesterday after a proceeding in the Court of Appeal.
He said in Indira's case, there was a conclusive finding that Riduan had shown disrespect to the civil court and there was also no Shariah court order to the police to do anything.
Applications to intervene by the Attorney-General and IGP were also disallowed after Riduan's appeal was struck out.
Riduan had refused to hand over Prasana Diksa despite a 2010 High Court order awarding custody of the couple's three children to Indira.
The Shariah High Court in Ipoh in 2009 had given Riduan custody of the three children after he unilaterally converted them to Islam.
However, in July last year, Lee quashed the conversion of the children and ruled that the certificates of conversion were unconstitutional.
On May 30, the court found Riduan guilty of contempt of court for failing to return Prasana Diksa to Indira.
The court also granted her a recovery order and warrant of arrest against her ex-husband.
Khalid, however, refused to follow the court and said police were caught between two court systems because of the different custody orders from a civil and Shariah court.
Lawyer Aston Paiva, who is a member of Indira's legal team, said the court could compel Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar to arrest Muhammad Riduan Abdullah and hand over Prasana Diksa to Indira.
Paiva said Khalid had a legal duty under the Police Act to enforce orders by a competent court.
A government lawyer is also expected to submit before judge Lee Swee Seng the reasons and circumstances that led police not to execute the orders.
If the judge is satisfied with the IGP's explanation, the police need not enforce the committal and recovery orders issued on May 30 this year.
On the other hand, if Lee is dissatisfied with the queries, he could still give time to the police to enforce the orders.
It is unclear, however, if a civil servant can be punished for refusing to carry out a legal duty as there is no past precedent.
A mandamus order is taken to compel a civil servant to perform or stop him from doing a certain act.
Paiva said Indira's mandamus application had now become stronger following the Court of Appeal's decision yesterday to strike out Riduan's appeal against his contempt of court for refusing to hand over Prasana Diksa.
A three-man bench led by Datuk Balia Yusof Wahi yesterday said the court would not hear a contemptor who has shown disrepect to court orders.
Lawyer M. Kula Segaran, who is representing Indira, said his client would drop her suit if police delivered Prasana Diksa to her.
"The IGP and his men still have time to locate Prasana Diksa and arrest the father (Riduan) and put him in a civil prison," he told reporters yesterday after a proceeding in the Court of Appeal.
He said in Indira's case, there was a conclusive finding that Riduan had shown disrespect to the civil court and there was also no Shariah court order to the police to do anything.
Applications to intervene by the Attorney-General and IGP were also disallowed after Riduan's appeal was struck out.
Riduan had refused to hand over Prasana Diksa despite a 2010 High Court order awarding custody of the couple's three children to Indira.
The Shariah High Court in Ipoh in 2009 had given Riduan custody of the three children after he unilaterally converted them to Islam.
However, in July last year, Lee quashed the conversion of the children and ruled that the certificates of conversion were unconstitutional.
On May 30, the court found Riduan guilty of contempt of court for failing to return Prasana Diksa to Indira.
The court also granted her a recovery order and warrant of arrest against her ex-husband.
Khalid, however, refused to follow the court and said police were caught between two court systems because of the different custody orders from a civil and Shariah court.
No comments:
Post a Comment