PUTRAJAYA, Aug 11 — The Court of Appeal today reserved its decision on an appeal by kindergarten teacher M. Indira Gandhi relating to her lawsuit against the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and three others over their failure to locate her ex-husband, who took their daughter away.
Justice Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, who chaired the three-judge bench, said due to the nature of the case, the court needed some time to deliberate on the submissions presented by Indira’s lawyer Rajesh Nagarajan and senior federal counsel Nur Ezdiani Roleb, who represented the IGP, the Royal Malaysia Police, the Home Ministry and the Malaysian Government.
The court set August 25 for case management. The other judges presiding on the bench were Justices Datuk Faizah Jamaludin and Datuk Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid.
Indira is appealing against the decision of the Kuala Lumpur High Court that dismissed her lawsuit seeking a declaration that the IGP has committed the tort of nonfeasance in public office over the failure to execute the committal warrant against her ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah as ordered by the Ipoh High Court.
She also wants a declaration that the other three respondents are vicariously liable for the tort of nonfeasance committed by the IGP, and for compensation in the form of general damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages.
Prasana Diksa was taken away by Muhammad Riduan when she was 11 months old, shortly after he converted to Islam. She is now 17.
In today’s proceeding, Rajesh argued in court that Muhammad Riduan had still not complied with a mandamus order issued by the Ipoh High Court requiring him to return Prasana Diksa to Indira, who holds legal custody of the child.
He also said the police failed in their duty by not locating Muhammad Riduan, despite the former IGP knowing his whereabouts, but still not enforcing the court’s committal order to apprehend him.
He said he was informed that Muhammad Riduan, previously known as K.Pathmanathan, had several outstanding summonses for traffic offences and was believed to have settled the summonses.
Nur Ezdiani countered by saying Indira failed to prove that all the respondents had neglected to take appropriate action in locating and arresting Muhammad Riduan.
She said that the police had made various efforts to track him down, including using the Special Task Force on Organised Crime (Stafoc) at the time.
On the traffic summonses claim, Nur Ezdiani said Indira had never filed any discovery application to verify the matter.
In 2009, Muhammad Riduan unilaterally converted his three children to Islam without Indira’s consent before going to the Syariah Court to obtain custody of the children, but in 2018, the Federal Court ruled the unilateral conversion of the three children null and void.
In 2010, the Ipoh High Court granted full custody of the children to Indira.
In May 2014, the civil High Court in Ipoh issued a committal order for Muhammad Riduan to be arrested for contempt of court over his failure to return Prasana Diksa to Indira, and also issued a recovery order by directing the police to find the child.
Indira subsequently obtained in the High Court in September 2014 a mandamus order which compelled the IGP to enforce the two court orders, with the Court of Appeal later dismissing the mandamus order and the Federal Court in April 2016 restoring the mandamus order for the arrest of Muhammad Riduan. — Bernama
