IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR AND THE HON’BLR SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY CONTEMPT CASE No.1686 of 2013 BETWEEN Migrants Rights Council, Mahabubnagar Town and District.
…PETITIONER AND Sanjay Sudhir, Under-Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Sastri Bhavan, Labour, New Delhi and another.
…RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. P. SHASHI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondents: MR. B. NARAYANA REDDY ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL The Court made the following order:
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) In this contempt case non-compliance of the directions of this Court in WP.No.23939 of 2010 dated 17.09.2012 is complained of.
2. Petitioner states that it is a society working for the protection of rights of migrant Indians, who are involved in criminal cases abroad and need legal assistance. Petitioner society made representation to the respondents to provide legal aid and necessary assistance to such migrants but alleging inaction on the said representation, the writ petition was filed. This Court disposed of the said writ petition by directing the Union of India to consider the writ petition filed by the petitioner as a representation and take appropriate steps in the matter.
3. In this contempt case separate counter affidavits are filed by respondents 1 and 2. Counter affidavit filed by the first respondent states that on the representation of the petitioner, the Consulate had examined the issue in detail and the Consulate is providing free legal counseling to expatriate Indians through “Indian Worker Resource Centre” located at Dubai. The Consulate officials have been meeting the concerned individuals periodically after seeking consular access from Dubai Prison authorities. With regard to specific cases also it is mentioned that wherever required, the first respondent has ensured that an appeal is filed on behalf of the accused and legal firm is assisting the convicted migrants. Various such other steps taken by the Consulate and the first respondent are also listed in the counter affidavit.
4. Second respondent also filed a separate counter affidavit stating that the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs has taken all actions required to be taken and the directions of this Court are strictly followed. As soon as the status report is received by the Ministry, appropriate necessary follow up action is taken and wherever persons are convicted for serious offences, as per U.A.E. Laws, legal firms are engaged for taking up further proceedings such as filing appeal, mercy petition etc.
5. The counter affidavits of the both the respondents, as above, state that the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs as well as the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs are pursuing the interest of migrant Indians abroad and extending all necessary held to them, as set out in the counter affidavits.
6. We, therefore, feel that in view of the aforesaid counter affidavits, it cannot be said that the order of this Court is any way flouted or disobeyed by the respondents.
The contempt case is dismissed. The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J T. SUNIL CHOWDARY, J October 10, 2014 DSK