Ayushi Khandelwal vs Jay Gupta

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Orders Decided Jan 30, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1255279

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1255279
Court: Delhi Orders High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Amit Sharma
Decided On: Jan 30, 2026
Case Number: CM(M)/244/2026
Subject: Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue: Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ayushi Khandelwal

Advocate Mr. P. Banerjee, Ms. Arpita Rai, Ms. Aditi Singh Beniwal

Respondent

Jay Gupta

Advocate Ms. Malavika Rajkotia, Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Ms. Trisha Gupta

Excerpt

.....of india, 1950, seeks following prayers:-“a) set aside the impugned order dated 04.10.2025 passed by the ld. judge, family court-01, south, saket courts in hma 1831/2022; b) allow the appellant’s application under order xviii rule 17 and order xvi rule 2 cpc for: i) recall of the respondent/petitioner for further cross-examination; ii) discovery and production of relevant documents; iii) permission to summon and examine the additional witness referred to in the application; pass any other or further orders as this hon’ble court may deem fit in the interests of justice.”this is a digitally signed order. the authenticity of the order can be re-verified from delhi high court order portal by scanning the qr code shown above. the order is downloaded from the dhc server on 31/01/2026 at 13:48:094. vide the impugned order dated 04.10.2025, learned judge, family court-01, south, saket court, new delhi, had dismissed the application under order xviii rule 17 and order xvi rule 2 of the cpc recalling the respondent (pw-1) for further cross-examination on discovery of documents. the aforesaid application was preferred by the petitioner on the ground that she had recently come in possession of certain photographs from the social media platform of the respondent with another lady. it is submitted that the necessary averments that the respondent was involved in an extra-marital affair had been made in the written statement filed on behalf of the petitioner as well as in the aforesaid application.5. during the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing for summoning of ms. ‘g.k.’ as an additional witness.6. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, who appears on an advance notice, submits that the matter is fixed for final arguments before the learned family court, and the application moved on behalf of the petitioner is to delay the final arguments. it is further submitted that, in case, the.....

Full Judgment

$~46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 244/2026 & CM APPL. 6594/2026 AYUSHI KHANDELWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. P. Banerjee, Ms. Arpita Rai and Ms. Aditi Singh Beniwal, Advocates. versus

JAY GUPTA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Malavika Rajkotia, Mr. Ramakant Sharma and Ms. Trisha Gupta, Advocate.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA ORDER % 30.01.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL. 6592-93/2026 (Exemption) 2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Applications are disposed of. CM(M) 244/2026 & CM APPL. 6594/2026 3. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeks following prayers:-

“a) Set aside the impugned order dated 04.10.2025 passed by the Ld. Judge, Family Court-01, South, Saket Courts in HMA 1831/2022; b) Allow the Appellant’s application under Order XVIII Rule 17 and Order XVI Rule 2 CPC for: i) recall of the Respondent/petitioner for further cross-examination; ii) discovery and production of relevant documents; iii) permission to summon and examine the additional witness referred to in the application; Pass any other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interests of justice.”

4. Vide the impugned order dated 04.10.2025, learned Judge, Family Court-01, South, Saket Court, New Delhi, had dismissed the application under Order XVIII Rule 17 and Order XVI Rule 2 of the CPC recalling the respondent (PW-1) for further cross-examination on discovery of documents. The aforesaid application was preferred by the petitioner on the ground that she had recently come in possession of certain photographs from the social media platform of the respondent with another lady. It is submitted that the necessary averments that the respondent was involved in an extra-marital affair had been made in the written statement filed on behalf of the petitioner as well as in the aforesaid application.

5. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not pressing for summoning of Ms. ‘G.K.’ as an additional witness.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, who appears on an advance notice, submits that the matter is fixed for final arguments before the learned Family Court, and the application moved on behalf of the petitioner is to delay the final arguments. It is further submitted that, in case, the respondent is recalled as PW-1, he should also be allowed to cross- examine the petitioner with respect to said photographs as the case of the respondent is that the photographs are cropped.

7. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (i) Parties shall appear before the learned Family Court on 05.02.2026 for further cross-examination; (ii) Petitioner shall furnish a fresh affidavit of evidence with respect

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 31/01/2026 at 13:48:09 to the averments made in the aforesaid application preferred on her behalf; (iii) The petitioner shall remain present before learned Family Court for her cross-examination by the respondent; (iv) Respondent/PW-1 shall also appear before the learned Family Court on the aforesaid date for his further cross-examination; (v) It is made clear that the cross-examination of the parties will be limited to the issues raised in the application filed on behalf of the petitioner, and no further opportunity shall be given for further cross- examination. 8. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. 9. Copy of the order be sent to the concerned learned Family Court-01, South, Saket Court, New Delhi, for necessary information and compliance. 10. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith.

AMIT SHARMA, J JANUARY 30, 2026/sn/ns

Same Court & Year Delhi Orders · 2026 Same Parties Ayushi Khandelwal vs Jay Gupta Same Subject Right to Information Same Judge Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Amit Sharma