Dismissed

Rohit Lamba & Anr. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC7 Feb 2026CRL.M.C./412/2026

Download

Case brief

from the order text

What is this about?

412/2026 Page 1 of 5 pages $~3 * IN THE HIGH…

What did the court decide?

None granted; dismissal with exemplary costs of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Police directed to take legal action; copies sent to Family Court, Marriage Registration Office and Bar Council of Delhi.

What the court decided

AI extract

Rohit Lamba & Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 07.02.2026

¶4

- CRL.M.C. 412/2026

¶5

ROHIT LAMBA & ANR. .....Petitioners

¶6

Through: Mr. Brahm Kumar Pandey, Advocate with petitioners in person.

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents

¶9

Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State and Ms. Shehnaz Khan, Advocate with SI Rahul Ranjan, PS Harsh Vihar. Ms. Priyanka Rani, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person.

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶11

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶12

The petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 173/2023 of PS Harsh Vihar for offence under Section 498A/406/34/494 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and proceedings arising out of the same on the ground that the complainant de facto has compromised the disputes with them. Petitioner no.1 is the husband of complainant de facto and petitioner no.2 is mother-inlaw of complainant de facto. The complainant de facto has been impleaded as respondent no.2.

¶13

Learned APP for State assisted by Investigating Officer/SI Rahul

¶14

CRL.M.C. 412/2026

¶15

Page 1 of 5 pages

¶16

GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.02.07 16:12:11 -08'00'

¶17

Signature Not Verified

¶18

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 7.02.2026 16:16:18

¶19

Ranjan accepts notice.

¶20

Respondent no.2 identified by the Investigating Officer and accompanied with her counsel accepts notice.

¶21

In view of nature of this case, I spoke with both sides in Hindi to ascertain the truth. The truth that came out is extremely shocking. The petitioners have apparently played fraud with different authorities.

¶22

According to the impugned FIR, petitioner no.1 came in contact with respondent no.2 through social media as he approached her with proposal to get married; and petitioner no.1 got married with respondent no.2 and got their marriage registered with the Marriage Registration Officer on 13.10.2020. Further according to the impugned FIR, in August 2021while applying for some government scheme, when the respondent no.2 used the Aadhar Card of petitioner no.1, it was revealed that petitioner no.1 had already got married earlier with one Ms. Deepa, with whom he has two children. Besides, in her FIR, respondent no.2 also raised different allegations pertaining to the offence under Section 498A/406 IPC.

¶23

In the course of hearing today, it came out that despite the marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 being a void act ( because petitioner no.1 was already married ), the marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 was also got dissolved by way of decree of divorce dated 30.08.2025 with mutual consent. It appeared as if the learned Family

CRL.M.C. 412/2026

Page 2 of 5 pages

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 7.02.2026 16:16:18

¶29

Court was misled into passing the divorce decree. So, I requested both sides to show me a copy of the petition under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the basis whereof divorce decree ( Annexure P4 ) was obtained. On this, counsel for petitioners stated that since the divorce petition was filed by some other counsel, he does not have copy of the same. However, learned counsel for respondent no.2 produced before me a copy of the said petition. In the said petition, marital status of petitioner no.1 has been pleaded as bachelor.

¶30

Further, I spoke with respondent no.2 and she stated that even she was not aware about marital status of petitioner no.1 earlier. But there is no explanation as to why respondent no.2 also signed the divorce petition which described marital status of petitioner no.1 as bachelor. Counsel for respondent no.2 appearing today, was counsel for the present respondent no.2 before the Family Court as well. Even counsel for respondent no.2 did not disclose before the Family Court about the falsehood in the divorce petition.

¶31

As regards counsel for petitioners, as mentioned above, learned counsel Mr. Brahm Kumar Pandey stated that the divorce petition with false pleadings was filed by some other counsel, and he does not know who filed the same. The said divorce petition, as shown by counsel for respondent no.2 had been filed by counsel for both parties to that petition. As mentioned above, counsel for wife in the said petition was the same counsel who appears today and counsel for husband was one Mr. Mohd. Zahid. The

CRL.M.C. 412/2026

Page 3 of 5 pages

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 7.02.2026 16:16:18

¶37

address of Mr. Brahm Kumar Pandey, Advocate and Mr. Mohd. Zahid, Advocate is same, which is G-306, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. Further, at this stage, I have noticed that even vakalatnama filed in the present case on behalf of petitioners is of Mr. Brahm Kumar Pandey, Advocate as well as Mr. Zahid, Advocate.

¶38

In nutshell, it appears that petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 played fraud with the Family Court no.1, District Shahdara, Karkadooma Courts, Delhi by falsely declaring the marital status of petitioner no.1 as bachelor. In this exercise, counsel for both parties were apparently involved, as despite their knowledge of previous marriage of petitioner no.1, they presented false pleadings. Further, the petitioner no.1 also cheated the Office of Registrar of Marriages by falsely disclosing his marital status as bachelor, which led to issuance of marriage registration certificate to the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2. One cannot lose sight of the fact that Ms. Deepa, wife of petitioner no.1, their two children and one child born from relations between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 are sufferers for no fault of theirs.

¶39

In view of above circumstances, the petition is dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs. 1,00,000/- to be deposited within one week by petitioners online with www.bharatkeveer.gov.in, as well as with further following directions:

¶40

(i) the local police of PS Harsh Vihar shall immediately take appropriate legal action as regards the aforesaid and shall file a report with the Registry

CRL.M.C. 412/2026

Page 4 of 5 pages

Signature Not Verified

¶45

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 7.02.2026 16:16:18

¶46

of this Court within three days; and for compliance, copy of this order be sent to the concerned ACP forthwith;

¶47

(ii) the copy of this judgment be immediately sent to the learned Judge, Family Court-01, District Shahdara, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi for appropriate orders as regards the decree of divorce dated 30.08.2025 obtained by petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 in HMA 1588/2025;

¶48

(iii) the copy of this judgment be immediately sent to the Marriage Registration Office from where Marriage Registration Certificate was procured by petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2; and

¶49

(iv) the copy of this judgment be also sent to the Bar Council of Delhi for appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

¶50

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afe GIRISH c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1 KATHPALIA 5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8 01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.02.07 16:11:23 -08'00'

¶51

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

¶52

FEBRUARY 07, 2026/ dr

¶53

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:0 7.02.2026 16:16:18

¶54

CRL.M.C. 412/2026

¶55

Page 5 of 5 pages

Rohit Lamba & Anr. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Rohit Lamba & Anr. v. State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

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

Anup Gupta Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohit Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Wasim Khan Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Harsh Alias Deepanshu Vs the State of Govt of NCT of Delhi

Salam @ Channa Vs State (N.C.T.of Delhi)

Sunil Kumar Singh Vs State and Another