The proposition of law canvassed by Mr. Sasi is not only undisputable but the facts of the present case perfectly fit into the proposition. It is seen that the father willfully, deliberately and intentionally avoided to give access to the mother. He not just avoided to give access, but planned and schemed to deny the access. He did not hesitate to use the daughter as a tool in his schemes. He filed false criminal complaints of sexual assault on the 8 years old daughter, exposed her to police investigation, got her statement recorded and subjected her to medico-legal examination regardless of the impact of such activities on her. Unfortunately and shockingly in all these schemes, he was actively supported by his own mother, the grandmother of the child. As has already been observed by another Bench, the father is a habitual contemnor and has no regard whatsoever to the orders of the court. Therefore he is liable for action for contempt. In the facts and circumstance of the case, not just the action for contempt but he must also be subjected to punitive costs.

As regards the contempt petition, wherein the father alleges that the mother has committed breach of clause (7) of the consent terms by not withdrawing the complaint filed against him and his mother for commission of the offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. it been rightly pointed out by Ms. Farhana Shah that the offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. being not compoundable it was necessary for the father to file appropriate proceedings for putting an end to the same and in those proceedings the mother to have supported the father in view of clause (7) of the consent terms. The other two allegations of making false and contumacious statements in her contempt petition and not permitting the father to fetch the child after completion of access on scheduled time, are without any material to support and as such baseless. It is obvious that, the contempt petition filed by the father is nothing but a counterblast to the contempt petition filed by the mother. The same is liable to be dismissed with costs.