$~4 (SDB)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL)-2585/2024 NADIA RAHMAN .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan & Ms. Harshita Singhal, Advs.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, S.C. (Crl.) with Mr.

Abhinav Kumar, Adv. with Mr. Akshay Dagar, SI, PS Shaheen Bagh.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 06.12.2025

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CRL.M.A. 36412/2025

2. The present application has been filed by the Petitioner under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking renewal of a lapsed demand draft dated 7^th October, 2024 for a sum of Rs.7,50,000/-.

3. Vide order dated 30th September, 2024, the Court had directed the Respondent No.2/father to pay a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs to the Petitioner/mother so that she may arrange an accommodation near the school where the child is studying. Thereafter, on 23rd October, 2024, the Court had directed the Respondent No. 2/father to deposit the said Rs. 15 lakhs by way of two demand drafts of Rs. 7.5 lakhs each - one in favour of the Petitioner/mother and another in favour of the daughter.

4. The demand draft in favour of the Petitioner was deposited by Respondent No.2/father and the same has been released. However, in so far as the daughter is concerned, the demand draft has lapsed.

5. Vide order dated 14th January, 2025 the Court had directed as under:

“ 10. Insofar as the demand draft in favour of the daughter is concerned, even though it has lapsed, once the name of the daughter is reverted to the original name, directions for renewal of the demand draft shall be issued. [...]”

6. Further, vide order dated 12th September, 2025, the Court had directed as under:

“8. Once the Family Court/ Guardianship Court has passed an order for interim arrangement, the Petitioner may move an application placing on record the said order and thereafter, seek release of the Rs.7,50,000/- which is lying deposited with this Court. The release shall be considered at that stage.

9.Let thepartiesappearbefore the concerned Courti.e. Family Court-03, South East District, Saket, New Delhi on 20th September 2025 in case titled Md. Nadeem v.

Nadia Rahman being GP No.44/2024.”

7. Today, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the order dated 14^th October, 2025 passed by the ld. Family Court-03, South East District, Saket, New Delhi to submit that an interim arrangement has been put in place by the Court.

8. Issue notice in the application. The Respondent No-2/father is directed to renew the demand draft already deposited.

9. Let notice be served through ld. Counsel for the Respondent No.2 as well.

10. Let a reply be filed by the Respondent No.2/father within four weeks. 11. The Respondent No.2/father is directed to renew the demand draft dated 7^th October, 2024 which is already deposited.

12. List on 27^th January, 2026.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

AMIT SHARMA, J. DECEMBER 6, 2025 kk/sm