High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 07 DEL CK 0959

Nisheeth Kohli vs Sonal Malik

Delhi High Court · Decided on 22 July 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ajay Digpaul, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 4845 Of 2025, Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 21003, 21004 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 265 words

Ajay Digpaul, J

1.

By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks to set aside orders dated 01.11.2023, 20.06.2024 and 23.10.2024, passed under Section 23 of Domestic Violence Act, 2005 “The Act” by the Court of MM (Mahila Court)-01, North, District Court, Rohini, Delhi in Ct. Case No. 55/2017 titled Sonal Malik @ Sonal Kohli v. Nisheeth Kohli & Ors.

2.

At the outset, Mr. Prateek Goswami, learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the present petition is not maintainable under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 428 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (“BNSS”), as the impugned orders dated 01.11.2023, 20.06.2024 and 23.10.2024 are challengeable only under the specific provision of the Act.

3.

Section 29 of the Act prescribes appeal which reads thus:

“29. Appeal.—There shall lie an appeal to the Court of Session within thirty days from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate is served on the aggrieved person or the respondent, as the case may be, whichever is later.”

4.

At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition and approach the concerned court by availing the remedy under Section 29 of the Act.

5.

Accordingly, leave is granted and the petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned court in accordance with the law.

6.

In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

7.

It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove shall not to be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case before the concerned court.