Ritika Juneja v. Anshuman Narang

$~44 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CONT.CAS(C) 1537/2025 RITIKA JUNEJA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.C. Dhingra, Sr. Adv.

with Mr. Gaurav Dhingra and Mr. Shashank Singh, Advs.

versus ANSHUMAN NARANG .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Nitin Mehta, Mr. Arpit Rawat, Mr. Chirag Singh and Ms. Yukta, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

O R D E R

% 15.10.2025 CM APPL. 64846/2025 (For exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

Application stands disposed of.

CONT.CAS(C) 1537/2025 and CM APPL. 64845/2025 (Delay of 228 days in filing the Petition) 3.

Through the present Petition, the Petitioner prays for initiation of proceedings under Section 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 [hereinafter referred to as „C.C. Act‟] read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

4.

In substance, the marriage of the parties was dissolved by a judgment and decree of the Family Court on 23.12.2024 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Judgment‟].

5.

The Appellant is stated to have filed an Appeal against the 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 16/10/2025 at 14:08:57

Impugned Judgment under incorrect heading on 24.01.2024, which was for the first time listed before the Bench on 09.02.2024. The Respondent entered appearance and disclosed that he has already remarried. The Court put him certain questions with regard to venue of marriage, etc., and the Respondent was called upon to file affidavit. It is alleged that in the affidavit the venue of the marriage was different and in fact the marriage took place in April 2024. 6.

The jurisdiction of the C.C. Act is required to be invoked only in rare and exceptional cases. It is not an ordinary remedy which can be invoked for every error or mistake.

7.

At the most, the Appellant is alleging that the Respondent has re-married after the Appeal was taken up for hearing and the Respondent has made wrong statement before the Court.

Additionally, the Appeal filed by the Appellant is pending. 8.

In such a circumstance, this Bench does not find it appropriate to initiate the contempt proceedings, however, the Appellant shall have liberty to file appropriate application in the pending Appeal, if not already filed.

9.

The present Petition, along with pending application, is disposed of.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

OCTOBER 15, 2025/sp/sh 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 16/10/2025 at 14:08:57