Court orders impounding of passport for willful disobedience of maintenance orders to ensure compliance.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has upheld a contempt conviction against Amit Bhambral for failing to comply with maintenance orders issued by the Family Court. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Vikas Mahajan, dismissed Bhambral’s appeal against the orders dated 27th April 2026 and 18th May 2026, which found him guilty of contempt for non-payment of maintenance to his estranged wife, Neha Bhambral, and their minor child.
The case traces back to a Family Court order dated 20th July 2024, which mandated Amit Bhambral to pay Rs. 25,000 each to his wife and child, along with additional educational expenses, following a maintenance petition filed by Neha Bhambral under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Despite the clear directives, Bhambral, who resides in Dubai, UAE, failed to make any payments from September 2024 onwards, leading Neha Bhambral to file a contempt petition.
The High Court, in its detailed judgment, noted Bhambral’s deliberate disobedience and lack of compliance with both the Family Court and subsequent judicial directions, including an order from a coordinate bench dated 18th November 2024. The court observed that despite partial recovery through the attachment of Bhambral's bank account amounting to Rs. 3.5 lakhs, the arrears remained unpaid.
The division bench expressed concern over Bhambral's steadfast refusal to comply with the maintenance order and his insistence on a lump-sum settlement, which the court deemed insufficient given his ongoing non-compliance. Emphasizing the importance of upholding judicial orders, the court directed the impounding and suspension of Bhambral's passport to ensure his presence in court for sentencing.
The Bureau of Immigration and the Consulate General of India in Dubai have been tasked with implementing this directive. The court underscored the necessity of Bhambral's physical presence to undergo any potential sentence, highlighting his persistent evasion of legal responsibilities.
This judgment reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to enforcing maintenance orders and underscores the legal consequences of contempt of court, particularly in cases involving the welfare of dependents.
Bottom line:-
Non-compliance with maintenance orders passed by a Family Court and deliberate disobedience of judicial directions can lead to contempt proceedings, including steps like impounding the passport of the defaulter.
Statutory provision(s):
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Section 10, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Section 19, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125
Amit Bhambral v. Neha Bhambral@ Neha Sharma, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2934550
