Why the delay in deciding if IGP must locate my daughter, asks Indira

Kindergarten teacher M. Indira Gandhi is 'hoping against hope' that she will soon be reunited with her daughter, whom she has not seen since the child was 11 months old. – The Malaysian Insider file pic, February 13, 2016.

Concerned by the recent Federal Court decision to reject a High Court order for the police to recover a child in a custody dispute, kindergarten teacher M. Indira Gandhi is questioning the six-month delay in deciding a similar issue in her own custody battle with her Muslim convert ex-husband.

On Wednesday, the apex court cleared Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar over his refusal to locate eight-year-old Mithran from his father Izwan Abdullah and to hand the child over to his mother S. Deepa.

The court said custody orders from both the Seremban High Court and Shariah Court were valid and the IGP's quandary was understandable.

Khalid had taken the position that executing one order would mean showing disrespect for the other.

Indira had obtained a recovery order and warrant of arrest against her Muslim convert ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah from the High Court in 2013 to compel the police to locate her daughter Prasana Diksa, six, after he was cited for contempt for refusing to hand over the child to the mother.

Indira was granted full custody of her three children Tevin Darsiny, now 18, Karan Dinish, 17, and Prasana, by the Ipoh High Court in 2010.

The court also ordered Riduan, formerly known as K. Patmanathan, to return Prasana to Indira.
  
A year earlier, the Ipoh Shariah Court gave Riduan custody of the children after he unilaterally converted them to Islam.  

When Khalid refused to act due to conflicting custody orders, Indira obtained a mandamus order from the court to direct a public servant to execute his duties under the Police Act.

In December 2014, however, the Court of Appeal overturned the Ipoh High Court order, ruling that Khalid could not be compelled to recover Prasana or arrest Riduan.

Judges Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim and Datuk Ahmadi Asnawi, who allowed the appeal by Khalid and the attorney-general, said the court could not give effect to a private dispute.

Indira then appealed to the Federal Court against the appellate court's decision. The appeal was heard on August 21 last year and the court reserved judgment.

Lawyer M. Kulasegaran said one of the judges on the apex court bench who heard Indira's appeal had retired on Thursday, February 11.

Palace of Justice corporate communications and international relations division head Mohd Aizuddin Zolkeply confirmed with The Malaysian Insider that Tan Sri Abdull Hamid Embong was no longer in office.
   
Hamid was scheduled to retire on August 12 last year upon reaching 66, the mandatory retirement age for judges, but was given a six-month extension by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
 
Kulasegaran said he had written to the court to dispose the appeal on an urgent basis as Indira was "hoping against hope" to be reunited with Prasana.

"The mother is yearning to meet the child who was taken away by the father when she was an 11-month-old toddler," he told The Malaysian Insider.
 
Kulasegaran, who is also Ipoh Barat MP, said it was shocking that Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria did not monitor delivery of judgments involving a high profile case, espeicially one where a judge was about to retire.

"I will raise in the Dewan Rakyat next month why the Federal Court took up to six months to deliver its ruling when the public depended on the verdict on what to do next," he said.

Meanwhile, retired Federal Court judge Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram said Section 78 of the Courts of Judicature Act allowed the remaining four judges to deliver the decision.
  
"Hamid's judgment, if there was one, does not count because he has retired," he said.

Sri Ram said the law stated that if there was a tie (2-2), the appeal has to be reheard, adding that this had happened in a previous civil case.

- TMI