SC said that all attempts were being made by the man’s parents to surreptitiously leave the country and obstruct the course of justice

NEW DELHI: It is increasingly becoming common in matrimonial disputes involving NRI couples, particularly child custody cases, for one spouse to take the child to a foreign country where he or she works and refuse to submit to the jurisdiction of Indian courts, leaving the other partner behind. Now, Supreme Court has indicated that in such cases, the parents of the runaway partner have to face the consequences.Hearing such a case, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan revived a ‘Look Out Circular’ – monitor, trace, or restrict travel of individuals – against the parents of a man who clandestinely took away his three-and-a-half-year-old daughter to the US, without informing his wife, and has refused to bring her back to India.“The minor child, at the relevant point of time, aged three-and-a-half years, was taken away by the father to US. The mother is relentlessly trying to get her daughter back. The mother is in a pathetic condition. We have no idea in what circumstances the minor daughter is residing in US with her father, that too a working father,” the bench said.It added that all attempts are being made by the man’s parents to surreptitiously leave this country and obstruct the course of justice. “We have stayed the operation of the order passed by Madras High Court setting aside the Look Out Circular,” the bench said.It granted the man a last chance to come back to India with the minor child. “We have made ourselves more than clear that he has to come to India within four weeks from the US with her, failing which his parents will have to face severe legal consequences. We have made the parents understand in vernacular,” Supreme Court said.

The bench said that if he was not inclined to come to India within four weeks, then he should make necessary arrangements to put the child on board along with an escort. It also asked him to hand over the child to the mother if she reached US.“We have passed this order keeping in mind the interest of the child, who was taken-away by her father deceitfully when she was just three-and-a-half years of age. Why should she be deprived of the love, care and affection of her own mother? Why should he stay back in US along with the daughter?” the court said in its order and posted the hearing after a month.