Rishipreet Sachdeva vs Ravneet Kaur Sachdeva

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Orders Decided Apr 30, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1275566

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/1275566
Court: Delhi Orders High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Prateek Jalan
Decided On: Apr 30, 2026
Case Number: CRL.M.C./3061/2026
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

Rishipreet Sachdeva

Advocate Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Mr. Anirudh K. Mudgal, Mr. Shubhashish Sharma, Ms. Vaishnavi Saxena, Ms. Avni Soni, Ms. Sakshi Jain

Respondent

Ravneet Kaur Sachdeva

Advocate Mr. Manoj Chouhan, Mr. Ujjwal Singh Parmar, Ms. Neha Raj Singh

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi+ crl.m.c. 3061/2026, crl.m.a. 12470/2026, crl.m.a. rishipreet sachdeva .....petitioner through: mr. prashant mendiratta, mr. anirudh k. mudgal, mr. shubhashish sharma, ms. vaishnavi saxena, ms. avni soni & ms. sakshi jain, advocates.versusravneet kaur sachdeva .....respondent through: mr. manoj chouhan, mr. ujjwal singh parmar & ms. neha raj singh, advocates.coram:hon’ble mr. justice prateek jalanorder% 30.04.20261. the present petition, under section 528 of the bharaitya nagarik suraksha sanhita, 2023, arises out of complaint case [ct casewomen from domestic violence act, 2005 [“dv act”]. by an orderdated 09.04.2025, the mahila court closed the petitioner’s right to file a written statement in the proceedings. the petitioner assailed the saidorder before the appellate court, which upheld the said order vide orderdated 13.10.2025.2. in the course of hearing, learned counsel on both sides have come crl.m.c. 3061/2026 page 1 of 2to an agreement that the petition may be disposed of, in the following terms:- a. the petitioner had served a copy of a written statement under the dv act proceedings upon the respondent prior to 09.04.2025. the same be taken on record, subject to payment of costs of rs. 30,000/- by the petitioner to the respondent. b. the respondent’s application for interim maintenance is listed before the mahila court on 02.05.2026. the written statement may be taken on record on that date, subject to payment of costs as aforesaid. c. the petitioner will not seek any adjournment on the aforesaid date before the mahila court. d. the mahila court is requested to consider the application for interim maintenance as expeditiously as possible, having regard to the position of the board and the age of the matters pending before it.3. the petition, alongwith pending applications, stands disposed of with these directions. prateek jalan, j april 30, 2026 ‘pv’/ad/ crl.m.c. 3061/2026 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 3061/2026, CRL.M.A. 12470/2026, CRL.M.A. RISHIPREET SACHDEVA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Mr. Anirudh K. Mudgal, Mr. Shubhashish Sharma, Ms. Vaishnavi Saxena, Ms. Avni Soni & Ms. Sakshi Jain, Advocates.
versus
RAVNEET KAUR SACHDEVA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Chouhan, Mr. Ujjwal Singh Parmar & Ms. Neha Raj Singh, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

ORDER

% 30.04.2026

1. The present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharaitya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, arises out of complaint case [CT Case

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 [“DV Act”]. By an order

dated 09.04.2025, the Mahila Court closed the petitioner’s right to file a written statement in the proceedings. The petitioner assailed the said

order before the Appellate Court, which upheld the said order vide order

dated 13.10.2025.

2. In the course of hearing, learned counsel on both sides have come CRL.M.C. 3061/2026 Page 1 of 2

to an agreement that the petition may be disposed of, in the following terms:- a. The petitioner had served a copy of a written statement under the DV Act proceedings upon the respondent prior to 09.04.2025. The same be taken on record, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 30,000/- by the petitioner to the respondent. b. The respondent’s application for interim maintenance is listed before the Mahila Court on 02.05.2026. The written statement may be taken on record on that date, subject to payment of costs as aforesaid. c. The petitioner will not seek any adjournment on the aforesaid date before the Mahila Court. d. The Mahila Court is requested to consider the application for interim maintenance as expeditiously as possible, having regard to the position of the Board and the age of the matters pending before it.

3. The petition, alongwith pending applications, stands disposed of with these directions. PRATEEK JALAN, J APRIL 30, 2026 ‘pv’/AD/ CRL.M.C. 3061/2026 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi Orders · 2026 Same Parties Rishipreet Sachdeva vs Ravneet Kaur Sachdeva Same Subject Right to Information Same Judge Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Prateek Jalan