New Delhi, Jul 11 (PTI) A person who lies and makes an attempt to deceive the court interferes with the administration of justice, and is guilty of contempt, the Supreme Court said Monday, holding a Kenyan citizen of Indian origin guilty of contempt in a custody battle.

Irked over the "defiant" and "contumacious" behaviour of Perry Kansagra who had played "fraud" in securing the custody of his son, the top court on October 7 last year had recalled its earlier verdict and initiated suo motu contempt proceedings.

Also Read | Supreme Court Asks Centre to Consider Introduction of Bail Act to Streamline Release of Accused.

It had also directed the CBI to initiate action to secure and entrust the custody of the child to his mother.

A bench of justices Uday Umesh Lalit and P S Narasimha Monday held Kansagra guilty of criminal contempt and asked the authorities to secure his presence for awarding sentence for the contempt.

Also Read | Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann Appoints Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha as Chairman of Advisory Committee.

"It is ...well settled that a person who makes a false statement before the Court and makes an attempt to deceive the Court, interferes with the administration of justice and is guilty of contempt of Court," the bench said.

The court not only has the inherent power but it would be failing in its duty if the contemnor is not dealt with in contempt jurisdiction for abusing the judicial process, said Justice Lalit, writing the order for the bench.

"Though the instant proceedings can be taken to a logical conclusion and order of sentence can be awarded even in the absence of Perry, we give the final opportunity to Perry to present himself before this court on July 22, 2022 at 3.00 pm along with Aditya," it said.

It shall also be open to Perry to purge himself of contempt in which case a sympathetic view may be taken in the matter, it said.

"The Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi through its Director is directed to initiate appropriate proceedings by registering criminal proceedings against Perry and to secure and entrust the custody of Aditya to Smriti," it said.

The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs and the Indian Embassy in Kenya are directed to ensure that all possible assistance and logistical support is extended to the mother in securing the custody of Aditya, it said.

"It must be stated here that the ...Solicitor General had assured this Court during the hearings at the interim stages that every possible help and assistance shall be extended by the Union agencies and the Indian Embassy in Kenya in securing the presence of Perry and Aditya before this Court," it said.

Indian origin Perry Kansagra, who holds dual citizenship of Kenya as well as the United Kingdom, fought a custody battle for his son with his estranged wife in Indian courts and gave undertakings that he will abide by the conditions, and later, he got custody in 2020 from the apex court by allegedly giving a forged or wrong “mirror order” from the Kenyan High Court.

Later, he not only refused to obey the directions granting visitation or meeting rights to the mother but shockingly moved the Kenyan court for “declaration of invalidity of Indian jurisdiction and/or laws and/or judgments denying, violating and/or threatening to infringe the fundamental rights of the Minor through purported and unenforceable judgments and orders relating to the Minor under Articles 23(3) (d) of the Constitution of Kenya”.

Taking into account the “fraud” “contumacious” behaviour of Kansagra, the top court to recalled its verdict and gave a slew of directions against him including registration of a suo motu contempt case.

Earlier, the top court had sought Perry Kansagra's physical presence before it on November 16 last year and had asked the registry to pay Rs 25 lakh as litigation cost, from the amount deposited earlier by him with it, to his spouse.

"Though at every juncture solemn undertakings were given by Perry to the High Court and this Court, such undertakings were not only flagrantly violated but a stand is now taken challenging the very jurisdiction of the Indian Courts, despite having submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the Indian Courts.

"Such conduct, prima facie, can certainly be said to be contumacious calling for an action in contempt jurisdiction. Moreover, the non-disclosure of material facts by Perry at the relevant junctures also shows that he approached the Indian Courts with unclean hands,” the bench had said.

Justice Lalit had directed that the verdict of October 28, 2020, in the custody case and a subsequent order be recalled.

The Guardianship Petition filed by Perry in District Court, Saket for permanent custody of the son, and the resultant proceedings arising therefrom in the High Court are dismissed, it had said.

The orders granting custody having been recalled, the custody of the son with Perry is declared to be “illegal and ab initio void”, it said and had issued contempt notice to him in the case.

Perry married an Indian citizen on July 29, 2009, and she then moved to Kenya and settled in her matrimonial home.

The same year, she returned to India for the birth of their son and on July 1, 2010, the child went to Kenya with his parents where they lived.

In 2012, the mother filed a lawsuit in the Delhi High Court seeking a permanent injunction restraining his father and his parents from removing the child from her lawful custody, and the litigation culminated with the judgement of the apex court.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)