Allowed

P D/O Sh.M v. Bar Council of India & Ors.

Delhi HC16 Jan 2025W.P.(C)/550/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition by a defrauded wife against the Bar Council of India, the Court allowed the application to remove the petitioner’s address from respondent records and disposed of the matter, granting liberty to seek further remedies if grievance persists.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed subject to exceptions; records to be modified to remove petitioner’s address; liberty to avail remedies if aggrieved.

P D/O Sh.M Vs Bar Council of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~79

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 550/2025

¶4

P D/O SH.M .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Deepak Singh Thakur, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. T. Singhdev, Mr. Tanishq Srivastava, Mr. Abhijeet Chakravarty and Ms. Anum Hussain, Advs. for R2.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 16.01.2025

¶10

CM APPL. 2492/2025

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

Application stands disposed of.

¶13

W.P.(C) 550/2025

¶14

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the records qua the respondent no.3 be modified to remove the petitioner’s address in the records maintained by the respondent no.1 and respondent no.2.

¶15

The petitioner got married to respondent no.3 based on the misrepresentation by the respondent no.3 and without the knowledge of the fact that the respondent no.3 was already married with one Ms. Neetu, with whom he has three children.

¶16

The petitioner is stated to have lodged an FIR bearing No. 0704/2024,

¶17

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 24/01/2025 at 15:34:14

¶18

registered at Police Station Paschim Vihar East, Delhi under Section 376/506 of IPC. The respondent no.3 is also stated to have been arrested pursuant to the said FIR. The petitioner has also filed a petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking annulment of the marriage with respondent no.3.

¶19

The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that her address is being used as the permanent address of the respondent no.3 in the records available with the respondent no.2. It is submitted that grave prejudice has been caused as a result thereof.

¶20

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2, who appears on advance notice, submits that the present petition shall be treated as a representation by the said respondent and an endeavour shall be made to carry out the requisite amendment in the records so as to remove the petitioner’s address in respect of the particulars of the respondent no.3. It is assured and undertaken that the respondent no.2 will verify the factual position, and appropriate action shall be taken. It is further undertaken that the aforesaid exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible.

¶21

In view thereof, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition and the same is disposed of, however, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies in the event of the petitioner being aggrieved by the outcome of the aforesaid exercise.

¶22

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶23

JANUARY 16, 2025/ at

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 24/01/2025 at 15:34:14

P D/O Sh.M v. Bar Council of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P D/O Sh.M v. Bar Council of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S S.H. Enterprises Vs Principal Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax East Delhi

Prashant Reddy T. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Mandeep Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Hawkers Surksha Foundation Vs Union of India and Ors.

Seema Jamwal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kunte and Drabu Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 14(3) & Ors.

Elitecast Media Private Limited Vs Idbi Trusteeship Services Ltd.

Grid Solutions Oy (Ltd) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax International Taxation Circle 1(3)(1) & Anr.

Prashant Reddy T. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Smt Pratibha Khatri and Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Uttarakhand Powerlifting Assocation Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ann Shyla Cherian Vs Investors Education and Protection Fund Authority & Ors.

Shobhana Gupta Vs Atlas Cycles Haryana Ltd.

Riyajuddin Vs Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board & Ors.