HC Dismissed Writ Petition Seeking Direction to Conduct Inquiry Into Alleged Illegal Cash Transactions in Marriage

Case Details: Ateesh Agarwal vs. Union of India - [2025] 172 taxmann.com 1 (Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ. & Tushar Rao Gedela, J.
• Ms Shobha Gupta, Ms Sanskriti Shakuntala Gupta, Ms Akshita Mishra, Ms Simranjeet Kaur & Ms Shivika Chaddha, Advs. for the Petitioner.
• Kanav Vir Singh, Sr. Panel Counsel, Ms Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, Adv., Indruj Singh Rai, SSC, Sanjeev Menon, Rahul Singh, JSCs, Ms Anmol Jagga, Gaurav Kumar & Ms Varsha Sharma, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner and respondent no. 3 got married in 2022. However, the marriage failed, and respondent no. 3 deserted the petitioner on 01.06.2024, taking all her belongings and valuables. Subsequently, FIR No. 238/2024 came to be registered by the police.

Thereafter, a complaint was filed alleging that respondent nos. 3 to 6 gave Rs. 2 crores as dowry and simultaneously spent crores of rupees at the wedding. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted a formal complaint to the Income Tax Department on 20.11.2024 seeking an investigation/audit of the sources of income of respondent nos. 3 to 6 and their undisclosed cash transactions.

However, the Income Tax Department failed to act on the complaint. Aggrieved by the inaction, the petitioner filed a writ petition to the Delhi High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the petitioner was seeking a roving and fishing inquiry through the court process. This was clearly impermissible and cannot be countenanced. The petition was based on a matrimonial feud between the petitioner and respondent no. 3

The disputes were hotly contested and involved highly complex and disputed questions of facts which will not be within the purview of the Income Tax department to adjudicate. Similarly, such disputed questions of facts also cannot be adjudicated under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition was dismissed.