KUALA LUMPUR: M. Indira Gandhi (pic) has sued the police, Home Ministry and government over the authorities’ alleged failure to locate and return her 12-year-old missing child, Prasana Diksa, and is seeking RM100mil in damages.
The lawsuit was filed through law firm Messrs Raj & Sach at the High Court registry via e-filing here yesterday.
Indira, 45, named the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Royal Malaysia Police, Home Ministry and government as first, second, third and fourth defendants respectively.
In the statement of claim, Indira said the IGP had failed and refused to adhere to a committal order and a recovery order involving her missing child.
Both orders, she said, were obtained from the Ipoh High Court on May 30,2014.
The committal order stated that her ex-husband Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, 51, was to be committed to prison until Prasana was delivered to her while the recovery order stated for the court bailiff and the police to conduct a search, retrieve and return the child from Riduan to Indira.
Indira claimed the IGP failed to adhere to both orders on the basis that the latter was faced with two conflicting orders, namely an order by the Perak Syariah High Court that granted custody of their three children to Riduan and an order by the Ipoh High Court that granted custody to Indira.
On April 29,2016, she said the Federal Court held that the warrant of committal against Riduan must be executed and the proper authority to do so was vested in the police.The apex court also affirmed the High Court’s decision whereby a mandamus order could be directed towards the IGP to compel him to command the execution of the warrant.
Indira claimed the IGP made a statement to the media on Jan 27 where she alleged the latter was “aware” of Riduan’s location and was working on “a happy ending” for her.
“The first defendant’s (IGP) statement made it clear that he had not proceeded to arrest Riduan and hand Prasana over to me despite being aware of his location.
“To date, due to inaction, failure and omission of the first defendant, Prasana has not been retrieved from Riduan and returned to me, ” she said.
Indira claimed the IGP had committed the tort of nonfeasance in public office by failing to enforce the orders.
“The second, third and fourth defendants are vicariously liable for the first defendant’s act of nonfeasance.
“They have failed to ensure the first defendant has acted diligently to carry out the orders, ” Indira said.
Indira claimed the defendants’ conduct had directly or indirectly caused and extended the separation between her and her child and enabled Riduan to abscond.
She claimed to have suffered pain and anxiety as a result of constant worry over the safety and well-being of Prasana.
Indira is seeking general, aggravated and exemplary damages, interests, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.
When contacted, Indira’s lawyer, Rajesh Nagarajan, said his client would be seeking RM100mil in damages.
Indira and Riduan, or his birth name K. Patmanathan, were married on April 10,1993.
They have three children, P. Tevi Darsiny, now 23, P. Karan Dinish, 22, and Prasana.
On March 11,2009, Riduan converted to Islam and unilaterally converted the children to Islam.
On Sept 29,2009, he obtained a custody order of the children from the Syariah High Court in Perak.
It was reported that Prasana was taken away the same year.
Indira then filed an application in the civil High Court in Ipoh for custody and this was granted to her on March 11,2010.
The couple divorced in August 2012.
In January 2018, the Federal Court nullified the unilateral conversion of the children.
Did you find this article insightful?
100% readers found this article insightful