New Delhi, Jul 29 (PTI) A Delhi court has restrained a woman and her husband from stalking and harassing a man or his family members through any means of communication, besides restricting them from creating any nuisance in his north Delhi property.
Civil Judge Renu was hearing an application filed under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), seeking temporary injunction.
The plea filed by plaintiff Mukesh Taneja had said he is the owner of a property in north Delhi’s Vijay Nagar and that he met defendant no. 1 Nancy Verma in December 2019.
The plea had alleged that Verma subsequently proposed to Taneja and upon rejection, threatened to commit suicide, stalked his son and daughter on social media, pressured the plaintiff “to have a physical relationship with her and manipulated the plaintiff to fulfil her sexual desire”.
It said after her advances were spurned by Taneja as he was “an old and aged man”, Verma and her husband, Harvansh (defendant no. 2), visited Taneja’s property on several occasions in 2024 and 2025, where she “created a huge drama and also threatened the plaintiff to commit suicide”.
The plea had sought an interim injunction restraining the defendants (Verma and her husband) from entering, creating any hindrance or nuisance in the property.
It had also sought an ad-interim order against the defendants, directing them not to approach, communicate or stalk the family members, friends and neighbours of the plaintiff in any manner.
In an order dated July 25, the court noted that the defendants did not appear before it.
It said, “A mere look at the documents or pleadings must show that there is a genuine case. From a plain reading of the plaint and the documents, that is, screenshots of various chats between the plaintiff and the defendants, and CCTV footage, it is clearly established that the plaintiff has a strong case in his favour which needs to be decided on its own merit.” The court said the balance of convenience is also in the plaintiff’s favour as he could not be compelled against his wish to remain in contact with the defendants.
“It is the case of the plaintiff that due to the acts and actions of the defendants, the plaintiff is unable to live his life peacefully and freely and he has even put his phone permanently on the airplane mode due to which he is unable to receive calls or messages from family, friends and relatives,” the court said.
It noted that according to Taneja, he and his family members are under the threat of “being defamed” in the neighbourhood because of Verma’s visits.
“It clearly shows that the said acts of the defendant (Verma) are affecting the very fundamental rights of the plaintiff — interfering with his ability to move freely and preventing him from enjoying his life peacefully — which clearly violates fundamental rights and that such interference causes an irreparable injury which cannot be adequately redressed later,” the court added.
Allowing the application, it restrained the defendants and their agents from creating any kind of hindrance, obstruction, interference or nuisance in the property, besides barring them from entering the property or roaming anywhere within a 300-metre radius of it.
“Defendants are also restrained from stalking, harassing or following the plaintiff or any member of his family either in person or through any means of communication, including electronic, telephonic or social media platforms,” the court said.
It further restrained Verma and her husband from contacting Taneja or his family members directly, indirectly or through third parties.
“A violation of this order shall amount to contempt of court and shall be dealt with accordingly under the provisions of law,” the court said. PTI MNR RC
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.