SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 233

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, R. MAHADEVAN, JJ
ANCY ELIZABETH KOSHY – Appellant
Versus
ANEESH KATYAL – Respondent
Transfer Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).2814/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Liz Mathew, Sr. Adv., Ms. Gayatri Puri, Adv., Ms. Sonali Jain, AOR, Mr. Jayant Singh Chauhan, Adv., Mr. Siddhant Sahil, Adv., Ms. Bagavathy Vennimalai, Adv., Mr. Omkar Hemanth, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Pradeep Norula, Adv., Ms. Prerna Mehta, AOR

Court may stay proceedings when allegations appear retaliatory to earlier orders.

Headnote:The Supreme Court addressed the allegations made under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, observing that they appeared far-fetched and potentially retaliatory due to prior orders. It ruled to stay criminal proceedings against the petitioner's parents and suggested mediation. The court emphasized the importance of resolving this matter amicably and stipulated stay of all inter se proceedings.

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Though not called for but the petitioner and the respondent present before the Court in person.

3. At the outset, learned senior counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to our order dated 10.10.2025 in which, we had granted stay of further proceedings of the suit, which has been filed by the respondent-husband against the petitioner-wife, pending before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House, New Delhi of which, transfer was sought to Gurugram. It was submitted that ten days after that, an FIR was lodged by the respondent against the parents of the petitioner alleging acts which are criminal in nature under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act , 2012 (POCSO Act). The same is purportedly based on a video taken by the respondent-husband.

4. Prima facie, the Court finds the allegations to be far-fetched and it may also be as a direct result of the stay granted by this Court on 10.10.2025 of the proceedings of which transfer is sought.

5. In view thereof, we are inclined to grant stay of further proceedings in the said criminal case filed by the respondent against the parents of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly.

6. At the request of learned counsel for the parties for mediation, the Court suggested the name of Hon’ble Ms. Justice Hima Kohli, a former Judge of this Court, as Mediator, to which the parties readily agree.

7. At the request of the Court, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that she may be given some time to get in touch with Hon’ble Ms. Justice Hima Kohli and revert as to what would be the first day on which, she would want the parties to appear before her.

8. We have been informed that it would be convenient for her to interact with the parties initially on 23.02.2026 at 03:00 p.m.

9. We request the learned Mediator to submit an interim report, preferably within two months. It shall be open for the learned Mediator to work out any interim arrangement during such period. The learned Mediator shall fix her own fee for the exercise, which shall be borne equally by both the parties.

10. List on 30.04.2026.

11. Further, to facilitate mediation, all inter se proceedings pending between the parties, both civil and criminal, which may include their family members also, shall remain stayed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top