Jyoti Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Domestic Violence | Delhi HC (2026)

Jyoti Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Domestic Violence | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to petitioner to file appropriate appeal before the learned Divisional Commissioner; purely on humanitarian grounds, concerned ACP and SHO instructed to refrain from coercive action per the impugned order for 10 days from the decision date to enable filing of the appeal; copy of order given dasti; pending applications also disposed of in the same terms.

Issue for consideration

Whether the eviction order dated 31.01.2026 passed by the District Magistrate Court (West) in Eviction Petition No.1239/DCW/2025 under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act regime can be set aside, notwithstanding the petitioner's existing Section 12 PWDV Act order of 13.12.2025 restraining dispossessment of her and her two minor children from the shared household. +1 more

Court's answer

This Court recorded that the impugned eviction order dated 31.01.2026 is an appealable order, the appeal lying under Rule 22 (3) (4) of the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2009.

Ratio / Principle

Without making any observation on the merits, the Court disposed of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to file the appropriate appeal before the learned Divisional Commissioner.

Key takeaways

Purely on humanitarian grounds, the Court directed that the concerned ACP and SHO shall ensure no coercive action, in terms of the impugned order, is taken for a period of 10 days, to enable the petitioner to file the appeal before the Divisional Commissioner.ratio¶19
The Court expressly clarified that it made no observation qua the merits of the case.obiter¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Manoj Jain, J.), CRL.M.C. 1575/2026, decided 26.02.2026 (oral). Petitioner Jyoti sought setting aside of the eviction order dated 31.01.2026 of the District Magistrate Court (West) in Eviction Petition No.1239/DCW/2025 (styled Smt. Vijay Rani vs. Sh. Ajit Kumar and Anr.) directing her eviction within 30 days. She relied on her Section 12 PWDV Act petition, by which the Magisterial Court had ordered on 13.12.2025 that respondent No.3 be restrained from dispossessing her and her two minor children from the shared household, and counsel invoked Smt. S. Vanitha vs. The Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban District & Ors. (2021) 15 SCC 730 to argue that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 cannot override Section 17 PWDV Act shared-household protection. The Court declined to adjudicate merits: noting the impugned order is appealable under Rule 22 (3) (4) of the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2009 with an unexpired 60-day limitation, it disposed of the petition with liberty to appeal before the Divisional Commissioner; purely on humanitarian grounds it directed the concerned ACP and SHO to take no coercive action per the impugned order for 10 days; it expressly disclaimed any observation on merits; pending applications were likewise disposed of.

$~64

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 26^th February, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 1575/2026 & CRL.M.A. 6373/2026 & CRL.M.A. 6374/2026

JYOTI

.....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate.

versus

STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, APP for the State.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

Petitioner seeks setting aside of order dated 31.01.2026 passed by District Magistrate Court (West) in Eviction Petition No.1239/DCW/2025 tilted as Smt. Vijay Rani vs. Sh. Ajit Kumar and Anr. whereby she has been directed to be evicted from the premises in question within 30 days.

The foremost grievance of the petitioner is to the effect that, she already had an order from the concerned Magisterial Court before whom she had filed a petition under Section 12 of P rotection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act) and while considering the same, the learned Magisterial Court vide order dated 13.12.2025 has restrained respondent No.3 herein from dispossessing the petitioner as well as her two minor children from the shared household, except with due course of law until further orders. 3. It is submitted that since the legal representation is prohibited in the such Eviction Proceedings filed under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents

CRL.M.C. 1575/2026 1

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 6.02.2026 18:56:43

and Senior Citizens Act 2007 and Rules made thereunder, the abovesaid aspect could not be highlighted by her before the learned District Magistrate Court which has resulted in the abovesaid eviction order and apparent paradox. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon Smt. S. Vanitha vs. The Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban District & Ors. (2021) 15 SCC 730 submits that the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 , cannot be deployed to override and nullify the other protection in law, particularly that of right of a women of shared household under Section 17 of PWDV Act.

Fact, however, remains that the abovesaid order dated 31.01.2026 is appealable order and said order itself records that the appeal would lie under Rule 22 (3) (4) of Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules 2009 , and the period of limitation is 60 days which has yet not expired.

In view of the above, the present petition, without making any observation with respect to the merits of the case, is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file appropriate appeal before the learned Divisional Commissioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the abovesaid eviction order, the possession of the premises in question is required to be handed over within 30 days failing which the concerned ACP and SHO can take coercive action against the petitioner and he seeks a short breather.

Keeping in mind overall facts and purely on humanitarian grounds, concerned ACP and SHO shall ensure that no coercive action is taken, in terms of impugned order, for a period of 10 days from today. This is to enable the petitioner to file appropriate appeal before the learned Divisional

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 1575/2026 2

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 6.02.2026 18:56:43

Commissioner.

The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

Pending applications also stand disposed of in aforesaid terms.

It is, however, clarified that there is no observation by this Court qua the merits of the case.

A copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE

FEBRUARY 26, 2026/ss/sa

Signature Not Verified

CRL.M.C. 1575/2026 3

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 6.02.2026 18:56:43