Indira Gandhi sues IGP, police over failure to return daughter kidnapped by fugitive Muslim convert ex-husband
M. Indira Gandhi is suing the PDRM and three others for their failure to find and bring back her youngest daughter, who is abducted by her Muslim convert ex-husband, Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, 11 years ago. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 5 ― Copies of the writ of summons filed by a kindergarten teacher M. Indira Gandhi against the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM) and three others have been hand-delivered to all the defendants.
The teacher is suing the PDRM and three others for their failure to find and bring back her youngest daughter, who is abducted by her Muslim convert ex-husband, Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, 11 years ago.
Her lawyer, Rajesh Nagarajan when contacted said the writ of summons and the statement of claims had been handed over to the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and PDRM two days ago, and to the Home Ministry and the Government of Malaysia, yesterday.
“The case management has also been set for Nov 30 via e-review before the High Court Deputy Registrar Idamasliza Maarof,” he said.
In her statement of claim, Indira claimed that the IGP had deliberately and negligently ignored the mandamus order from the Federal Court and failed to investigate or take appropriate action to return her daughter, Prasana Diksa, to her.
She claimed that the IGP in his press statement dated Jan 27, 2020, said that he knew the whereabouts of her ex-husband, formerly known as K. Patmanathan, 51, and was trying to get a “happy ending” for the plaintiff.
“Based on the statement, it clearly showed that the first defendant failed to arrest Muhammad Riduan (Patmanathan) and return Prasana to me despite knowing his whereabouts,” she said.
Indira also claimed that all the defendants had played their roles in making decisions or ordering the PDRM to execute the committal warrant against Muhammad Riduan as ordered by the Federal Court on April 29, 2016.
She claimed that the behaviour of all the defendants had directly caused her separation from her youngest daughter, who is now 12, to continue until today and that their behaviour had also caused Mohd Riduan to flee.
She is seeking RM100 million in general, aggravated and exemplary damages, as well as a declaration that the first defendant had committed the tort of nonfeasance in public office, and the second, third and fourth defendants were also vicariously liable for the tort of nonfeasance committed by the first defendant.
Indira and Patmanathan were married on April 10, 1993, and had three children.
However, she said, on March 11, 2009, the man converted to Islam and changed the religion of their three children to Islam and that on Sept 29, 2009, he had also obtained the custody of the three children from Ipoh Syariah Court.
The plaintiff said she then filed an application for full custody of the children which was granted by Ipoh High Court on March 11, 2010.
However, Prasana was forcibly taken by Muhammad Riduan after the court ordered him to hand over the children to their mother.
The couple divorced on August 8, 2012. ― Bernama
The teacher is suing the PDRM and three others for their failure to find and bring back her youngest daughter, who is abducted by her Muslim convert ex-husband, Muhammad Riduan Abdullah, 11 years ago.
Her lawyer, Rajesh Nagarajan when contacted said the writ of summons and the statement of claims had been handed over to the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and PDRM two days ago, and to the Home Ministry and the Government of Malaysia, yesterday.
“The case management has also been set for Nov 30 via e-review before the High Court Deputy Registrar Idamasliza Maarof,” he said.
In her statement of claim, Indira claimed that the IGP had deliberately and negligently ignored the mandamus order from the Federal Court and failed to investigate or take appropriate action to return her daughter, Prasana Diksa, to her.
She claimed that the IGP in his press statement dated Jan 27, 2020, said that he knew the whereabouts of her ex-husband, formerly known as K. Patmanathan, 51, and was trying to get a “happy ending” for the plaintiff.
“Based on the statement, it clearly showed that the first defendant failed to arrest Muhammad Riduan (Patmanathan) and return Prasana to me despite knowing his whereabouts,” she said.
Indira also claimed that all the defendants had played their roles in making decisions or ordering the PDRM to execute the committal warrant against Muhammad Riduan as ordered by the Federal Court on April 29, 2016.
She claimed that the behaviour of all the defendants had directly caused her separation from her youngest daughter, who is now 12, to continue until today and that their behaviour had also caused Mohd Riduan to flee.
She is seeking RM100 million in general, aggravated and exemplary damages, as well as a declaration that the first defendant had committed the tort of nonfeasance in public office, and the second, third and fourth defendants were also vicariously liable for the tort of nonfeasance committed by the first defendant.
Indira and Patmanathan were married on April 10, 1993, and had three children.
However, she said, on March 11, 2009, the man converted to Islam and changed the religion of their three children to Islam and that on Sept 29, 2009, he had also obtained the custody of the three children from Ipoh Syariah Court.
The plaintiff said she then filed an application for full custody of the children which was granted by Ipoh High Court on March 11, 2010.
However, Prasana was forcibly taken by Muhammad Riduan after the court ordered him to hand over the children to their mother.
The couple divorced on August 8, 2012. ― Bernama
IGP still working out Happy Ending?
ReplyDeleteIt is good that she has sued the IGP. But, to expect any favourable outcome is a fool's dream.
ReplyDeleteThis is a conspiracy by the whole malay/muslim establishment and the IGP will be protected