PANKAJ NARWAL vs JYOTI

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 18.11.2025 Judgment pronounced on: 03.12.2025 Judgment uploaded on: 03.12.2025 + CRL.REV.P. 646/2024 & CRL.M.A. 15011/2024 PANKAJ NARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Juhi Arora, Advocate (through VC) versus JYOTI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Advocate (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA JUDGMENT DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J 1. By way of the present revision petition, the petitioner is seeking setting aside of the order dated 19.01.2024 [hereafter „impugned order‟], passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- 05, North-West, Rohini Court, Delhi [hereafter „Sessions Court‟] in the appeal (C.A. No. 167/2023) filed by the petitioner-husband under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 [hereafter „PWDV Act‟]. 2. By way of the impugned order, the learned Sessions Court upheld the order dated 01.06.2023 passed by the learned MM, Mahila CRL.REV.P. 646/2024 Page 1 of 12 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:03.12.2025 18:17:16 Court-02, North-West, Rohini Court, Delhi [hereafter „Trial Court‟] in CT Case No. 7228/2019, titled “Jyoti v. Pankaj Narwal” whereby the learned Trial Court had allowed an application filed under Section 25(2) of the PWDV Act by the respondent-wife seeking alteration/review of the order dated 08.04.2022 and enhanced the interim maintenance from Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 11,000/- per month. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 06.03.2014, and one son was born from the wedlock. The respondent-wife has alleged that soon after marriage, she was subjected to verbal, physical, mental and economic abuse by the petitioner-husb