The Kerala High Court in the case Mount Zion College of Engineering, Kadamanitta v. Dr. Divya S. Iyer observed and has held that the contempt petitioner cannot be insisted upon in order to provide the age and name of the father, mother, or husband of the respondent in the case of contempt.
The single bench headed by Justice V.G. Arun in its order stated that the finding merit in the contention advanced by the counsel appearing for the petitioner that as per Rule 5(a) of the Contempt of Court Rules, the contempt petitioner is only required to provide the name, occupation, and the full address of the respondent.
The court in the case observed wherein the contempt plea is moved by Mount Zion College of Engineering, Kadamanitta, against the District Collector of Pathanamthitta Dr. Divya S. Iyer IAS. The court also observed that it has been stated that Rule 5(a) requires a contempt petitioner for providing the name of father, mother or husband of the respondent only as far as it is possible.The court while considering the matter observed and has directed the Registry to ascertain the reason for insisting the contempt petitioner to provide the age and name of the father, mother, or husband of the alleged respondent on July 11, 2023. Further, the court also held that even if the objection is made in this regard and the same had been upheld by another bench. Therefore, the Registry in the case would be bound to the number in the contempt case. The counsel, Advocate Jestin Mathew appeared on behalf of the petitioner college.
