Seniority Must Be Calculated From the Date of Initial Appointment, Not Regularization: Madras High Court Rules Section 319 Cr.P.C. | Mere Association Not Enough for Criminal Liability: Karnataka HC Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds ₹25,000 Per Kanal Compensation for Land Acquired for Nangal-Talwara Railway Line, Dismisses Railway’s Appeal No Work No Pay Principle Not Applicable: Orissa High Court Orders Reinstatement and Full Back Wages for Wrongfully Terminated Lecturer No Assault, No Obstruction, Only Words Exchanged: Bombay High Court Quashes Charges of Obstruction Against Advocates Under Section 353 IPC Matrimonial Offences Can Be Quashed Even if Non-Compoundable, When Genuine Compromise Is Reached: J&K HC Plaintiff Entitled to Partition, But Must Contribute Redemption Share to Defendant: Delhi High Court Clarifies Subrogation Rights in Mortgage Redemption Labeling Someone A 'Rowdy' Without Convictions Infringes Personal Liberty And Reputation: Kerala High Court P&H High Court Denies Pensionary Benefits for Work-Charged Employee's Widow; Declares Work-Charged Service Not Eligible for ACP or Pension Benefits Acquittal is Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court Orders Appointment of Candidate Denied Job Over Past FIR At The Bail Stage, Culpability Is Not To Be Decided; Allegations Must Be Tested During Trial: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in SCST Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to "Secular" and "Socialist" Additions in Constitution Preamble Supreme Court Rejects Res Judicata in Land Allotment Case: Fresh Cause of Action Validates Public Interest Litigation Public Resources Are Not Privileges for the Few: Supreme Court Declares Preferential Land Allotments to Elites Unconstitutional Past antecedents alone cannot justify denial of bail: Kerala High Court Grants Bail Revenue Records Alone Cannot Prove Ownership: Madras High Court Dismisses Temple's Appeal for Injunction Humanitarian Grounds Cannot Undermine Investigation: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Interim Bail in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam The Power Under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 CPC is Drastic and Extraordinary; Should Not Be Exercised Mechanically or Merely for the Asking: Calcutta High Court Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 10-A: Upholds Transparency in Public Employment Absence of Homogeneous Mixing and Procedural Deficiencies Vitiate NDPS Conviction: Punjab and Haryana High Court Business Disputes Cannot Be Given Criminal Color: Patna High Court Quashes Complaint in Trademark Agreement Case Gujarat High Court Appoints Wife as Guardian of Comatose Husband, Calls for Legislative Framework Standard of Proof in Professional Misconduct Requires 'Higher Threshold' but Below 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Delhi High Court Imprisonment Cannot Bar Education: Bombay HC Allows UAPA Accused to Pursue LL.B. High Court Acquits Accused in Double Murder Case, Asserts ‘Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof’ Long separation and irreparable breakdown of marriage must be read as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Regulation 101 Applies to All Aided Institutions, Including Minority Ones, Says Allahabad High Court Fraud Unravels All Judicial Acts : Jharkhand High Court Orders Demolition of Unauthorized Constructions in Ratan Heights Case Suspicious Circumstances Cannot Validate a Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds 1997 Will Over 2000 Will

"Matrimonial Dispute Resolved Amicably, Both FIRs Quashed": Delhi High Court Gives Verdict in High-Profile Case Involving Two Lawyers

06 September 2024 5:39 AM

By: Admin


In a recent landmark judgment, the High Court of Delhi resolved a matrimonial dispute involving Wasim Ahmad and his spouse, both lawyers, and quashed two FIRs lodged against him. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma passed the verdict on August 29, stating, "the issue in the present case stems from a matrimonial dispute between the parties. The parties have already settled the matter and have been granted Talaq."

Wasim Ahmad, represented by Mr. D.K. Srivastava, was implicated in two FIRs filed by his spouse. The first FIR alleged mental and physical harassment, cruelty, dowry demands, and threats to life. The second FIR was registered under Section 354 IPC and 10 POCSO Act, accusing Wasim Ahmad of inappropriate behavior with their daughter. Both cases were heard together as W.P.(CRL) 1967/2023 and W.P.(CRL) 1969/2023.

During the course of the proceedings, both parties reached an amicable settlement before the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts. They agreed to separate through mutual consent (talaaq) and withdrew all pending litigations. A divorce certificate dated 11.05.2023 was also placed on record. In terms of child custody, both minor children will remain with the wife, and the husband will have visitation rights.

Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma considered the submissions and concluded that continuing the FIRs would "amount to abuse of the process of the court."

"Submissions considered," the judgment read. "Upon a careful perusal of the FIR and the pleadings before this Court, it is amply clear that the issue in the present case stems from a matrimonial dispute between the parties."

The ruling sets a precedent for the court's approach to matrimonial disputes that have been amicably resolved between the parties. It also emphasizes the importance of mediation in resolving such cases, thereby unburdening the judiciary.

The parties were present in person and were duly identified. Both expressed their relief at the conclusion of the matter and stated that they had resolved their differences voluntarily "without any fear, force or coercion," keeping in mind the "betterment and future of the children."

 Date of Decision: August 29, 2023

 xxx vs xxx

Similar News