Allowed

Rachna Singh v. Sachin Kumar

Delhi HC12 Jan 2024MAT.APP.(F.C.)/375/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This matter is an appeal against a Family Court order directing the deportation of an appellant wife and children residing in the Netherlands. The High Court held the direction misconceived and unsustainable in law as it impermissibly affected the rights of the children.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order directing deportation of the appellant-wife and her children was set aside and quashed.

Rachna Singh Vs Sachin Kumar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~13

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- MAT.APP.(F.C.) 375/2023

¶4

RACHNA SINGH ..... Appellant Through: Mr Maroof Ahmad, Advocate versus

¶5

SACHIN KUMAR ..... Respondent Through: Mr Vikram and Mr Akhil Ganga, Advocates along with respondent in person.

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶7

O R D E R % 12.01.2024

¶8

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

¶9

This appeal is directed against the order dated 20.10.2023, passed by the learned Family Court Judge.

¶10

The record shows that the respondent/husband had instituted a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, to seek divorce on the ground of cruelty.

¶11

While the proceedings were on, parties appear to have drawn up a Settlement Agreement dated 03.07.2023 [ in short “SA”].

¶12

3.1. A perusal of the impugned order shows that broadly, the parties had agreed that they would seek divorce based on ‘mutual consent’.

¶13

It appears that the appellant/wife resiled from the settlement arrived at between the parties. Since, the appellant-wife was not clear about certain terms of the SA, the parties were referred to the Mediation Centre. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 375/2023 Page 1 of 3

¶14

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 13/05/2024 at 15:19:07

¶15

The learned Family Court Judge also records that the appellant/wife reneged from the commitment which was captured in the SA.

¶16

Because the appellant/wife resiled from her obligations under the SA, the learned Family Court Judge decided to take recourse to measures which, according to us, are completely unsustainable in law.

¶17

The learned Family Court Judge, having regard to the fact that the appellant/wife, along with her two children, was located in Netherlands, and was not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Court in India, decided to issue a direction for her deportation.

¶18

7.1. It is in this context that the learned Family Court Judge called upon the Government of India via the Ministry of External Affairs to interface with the Government of Netherlands so that the appellant/wife along with her children is deported to India.

¶19

The divorce petition is listed for further proceedings before the learned Family Court Judge on 19.01.2024.

¶20

The record also shows that when the appeal came up for hearing before the coordinate bench, the operation of the impugned order dated 20.10.2023 was stayed by an order dated 18.12.2023.

¶21

According to us, the direction contained in the impugned order to have the appellant/wife and her children deported to India is completely misconceived.

¶22

The learned Family Court Judge should not have passed such a direction, which affected not only the appellant/wife but also the rights of her children.

¶23

In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. MAT.APP.(F.C.) 375/2023

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

¶26

The learned Family Court Judge is requested to take up the matter on the date already fixed i.e., on 19.01.2024.

¶27

Counsel for the appellant/wife shall remain present on the said date.

¶28

14.1 Furthermore, the appellant/wife will join the proceedings through video-conferencing [ in short, “VC”].

¶29

The learned Family Court Judge will transmit a link of his court to the appellant/wife 48 hours prior to the next date of hearing i.e., 19.01.2024. 16. Needless to add, if the appellant/wife does not join the proceedings via VC, the learned Family Court Judge will be free to draw adverse inference against her in the matter.

¶30

16.1 We may note that the father of the appellant/wife who is acting as her special power of attorney holder is present in Court.

¶31

Accordingly, the present appeal is disposed of.

¶32

The pending applications are closed.

¶33

Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

¶34

The Registry is directed to dispatch a copy of the order to the concerned

¶35

court.

¶36

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

¶37

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶38

JANUARY 12, 2024 /rt

¶39

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶40

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 375/2023

¶41

Page 3 of 3

¶42

This is a digitally signed order.

¶43

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 13/05/2024 at 15:19:07

Rachna Singh v. Sachin Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rachna Singh v. Sachin Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikram Shekhawat Vs Sangeeta Shekhawat

Rahul Verma Vs Isha

Ranjana Sharma Vs Vijay Kumar Sharma

Asheema Khanna Vs Nishant Saini

Gaurav Saini Vs Riti Saini

Sandeep Vs Siya

Mr Pramod Kumar Vs Mrs. Archana

Vermeet Singh Taneja Vs Jasmeet Kaur

Thakar Dass Bhatia through Son Chetan Bhatia Vs Suresh Kumar Bhatia & Ors.

Vikram Shekhawat Vs Sangeeta Shekhawat

Rahul Verma Vs Isha

Rekha Sharma Vs Sanjay Sharma

Pramod Gupta Vs Cement Corporation of India & Anr.

Rajesh Kumar Lalan Goswami Vs Union of India and Anr.