in the court of mohommad sageer judicial magistrate … … · punita wife of shri brijesh kumar...

CNR No: HRFB030048622015CIS No: D.V.ACT/309/2015

Punita Vs. Brijesh Verma and others 1

UID No. HR0381

IN THE COURT OF MOHOMMAD SAGEER JUDICIALMAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, FARIDABAD.

UID No. HR0381CIS No. D.V.309/2015Petition RBT No. : 225Date of Instt: 1.5.2015/10.9.2017Date of Decision : 3.9.2019

Punita wife of Shri Brijesh Kumar Verma D/o Shri Rajender Singh Soni R/oH. No. 1350, Sector-3, Faridabad.

…..Applicant

Versus

1. Brijesh Verma son of Shri Suresh Verma2. Suresh Verma son of Balkishan3. Smt. Bimla Devi wife of Suresh Verma

…Respondents.

Petition under Section 12, 18, 19 and 21 of the Protection of Womenfrom Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Present: - Shri Narender Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. Shri P.K. Tyagi, Advocate for the respondents

JUDGMENT:

By filing the present petition under Section 12, 18, 19 and 21 of

the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (here-in-after to

be referred as Act, 2005), the petitioner- Punita sought the relief of protection

Mohommad Sageer/JMIC/Faridabad/3.9.2019



UID No. HR0381

order; residence order, monetary relief and compensation under Sections 12,

18, 19 and 21 respectively of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence

Act, 2005 and any other order which may be deemed fit by the Court in

connection with the facts and circumstances of the present case.

2. As per the averments made in the petition, are that the marriage

of applicant was solemnized with respondent no.1 Brijesh on 4.4.2014 as per

Hindu rites and ceremonies at Faridabad and at the time of marriage, a huge

amount of Rs. 2 lacs was spent. For the purpose of engagement, respondents

came at the residence of applicant on dated 3.12.2012 and fixed the

engagement. The respondent started visiting applicant at her hostel at Rohtak,

where she was staying during her MCA course. The respondent developed all

relationship with the applicant. On 19.12.2012, respondent no.2 called up

father of applicant to break the engagement of complainant and respondent

no.1 want to lavish marriage to the extent of Rs. 50 lacs. After breaking up of

engagement ties between the applicant and respondent no.1, the respondent

no.1 did not allow the applicant to leave peacefully and he continued to create

nuisance against her by all possible means. Thereafter, the applicant got

lodged a complaint against the respondent no.1, upon which all the




UID No. HR0381

respondents compromised the matter and agreed to marry the respondent no.1

with the complainant. After solemnization of marriage, respondents again

raised demand of dowry and demanded Rs. 35 lacs and harassed the applicant

physically and mentally. The respondent no.1 started compelling the applicant

to seek divorce from him or he would divorce the applicant. On 11.5.2014,

when the brother of applicant came to Rohtak to see the applicant, all the

respondents after committing physical violence upon her, forcefully ousted her

with her brother. Since then applicant is living at the mercy of her friends and

relatives. She has no source of earning and is under acute mental depression. It

is further submitted that the respondent no.1 is serving with M/s Espire

Infolabs Private Limited and is earning a salary of more than Rs. 1 lacs,

whereas, the applicant is a household lady and has no independent source of

Income to maintain herself. With these submissions, it is prayed that petition

may kindly be allowed.

3. Upon notice, respondents appeared and filed their written

statement, wherein it is submitted that the marriage of applicant and

respondent no.1 was arranged marriage and was solemnized under the rites

and customs of Hindu Marriage Act. After marriage, the respondents provided




UID No. HR0381

all the comforts and necessities of life to the applicant. She never cared to

discharge day to day household liabilities. Initially the answering respondents

ignored the behaviour of applicant thinking that with the passage of time good

sense would prevail upon the applicant. The applicant started to pick up

quarrels with her in law without any reason. On dated 14.3.2016, near the

HUDA Parking, Sector-12, Faridabad the applicant along-with her parents and

some unsocial type persons attacked on the respondent no.1 and beat him

badly. It is further submitted that the provident fund number of the

complainant as provided by the EPF department through RTI is

GN/GGN/10640/89517. It is further submitted that initially applicant was

employed with M/s Concentrix Dakash Services India Pvt Ltd was earning Rs.

25,000/- per month and now the applicant is working under the employment

of M/s Accenture Service Private Limited, Gurgaon and is getting salary of

Rs. 26,000/- per month and other benefits. The salary of complainant is being

transferred in her salary account No. 39601521481 in ICICI Bankk. It is

further submitted that the respondent has been working with M/s Espire

Infolabs Private Limited, but it is denied that he is drawing a salary of Rs. 1

lac per month. He is regularly paying EMI of HDFC Bank of Rs. 28,692/- per

month, house rent of Rs. 16,000/- per month, life and health insurance of Rs.




UID No. HR0381

3660/- per months, unmarried sister education fee Rs. 4850/- per month,

family medical bill of Rs. 1250/- per month, family kitten expenses Rs.

9,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- per month. Further there is denial to the facts as

averred in the petition and prayer of dismissal of the present petition.

4. To prove her case, petitioner examined herself as CW1 and

tendered affidavit Exhibit. CW1/A .

Thereafter, petitioner evidence was closed by court order dated

18.4.2019.

5. To rebut this, respondent has examined following witnesses:-

Aman Bhatia as RW-1, who brought the summoned record i.e. Resume

Exhibit. R1, Joining Form Exhibit. R2, Appointment Letter Exhibit. R3,

Revision of In compensation Letter Exhibit. R4, Salary Slip Exhibit. R5.

Praveen Kumar was examined as RW-2, who brought the summoned record

i.e. Offer Letter Exhibit. R6, Pay Slip Exhibit. R7, Increment Revision letter

Exhibit. R8, Application Form Exhibit. R9.




UID No. HR0381

Ram Kishan was examined as RW-3 and who brought the summoned record

i.e. PF Statement Exhibit. R10.

Gabrid Kajur, Section Supervisor was examined as RW-4, who brought

the summoned record i.e. PF Statement account Exhibit. R11.

Sakendra Prajapati was examined as RW-5, who brought the summoned

record i.e. Statement of account Exhibit. R12, Application form of opening

account Mark-A.

Tahir Mohammad was examined as RW-6, who brought the summoned

record i.e. Opening form of account No. 001491800106625 Exhibit. R13,

Statement of account Exhibit. R14.

Krishan Kumar was examined as RW-7 who brought the summoned record

i.e. Account Opening Form Exhibit. R15, Statement of account Exhibit. R16.

Deepak Swami was examined as RW-8, who brought the summoned record

i.e. Authority letter Exhibit. R17, Salary Slip Exhibit. R18, Experience letter




UID No. HR0381

Exhibit. R19, Appointment letter Exhibit. R20.

Thereafter, respondent examined himself as RW-9 (Inadvertently marked

as RW-8) and tendered his affidavit Exhibit. RW9/A and documents Salary

Slip Exhibit. DW1, Statement of Ashwani Kumar Exhibit. DW2, Bank

Statement Exhibit. DW3, Statement of Santosh Exhibit. DW4, PF Statement

Exhibit. DW5, Statement of Jugal Kishore Exhibit. DW6, Affidavit of Suresh

Kumar Exhibit. DW7, Email Exhibit. DW8, Transcript Mark X3, Transcript

Mark-X4, Transcript Copy Mark-X5, Copy of FIR Mark-X6, Copy of FIR

Mark-X7, Copy of affidavit Exhibit. DW9, Bail Order Exhibit. DW10, Copy

of judgment Exhibit. DW11, Order of Hon’ble High Court Exhibit. DW12,

Order of Hon’ble High Court Exhibit. DW13, Statement of Punita and Brijesh

Exhibit. DW14, Statement of Punita Exhibit. DW15, Photographs Exhibit.

DW16 to Exhibit. DW24, Copy of Order Exhibit. DW25, Copy of Petition

Exhibit. DW26, Copy of Order Exhibit. DW27, Statement Exhibit DW-29,

Document Exhibit. DW30, Statement of Punita Exhibit. DW31, Statement

under Section 164 of Cr.PC of Punita Exhibit. DW31, Reply of RTI Exhibit.

DW33, Photographs Exhibit. DW33 to Exhibit. DW42, Affidavit Cum

Certificate under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act Exhibit. DW43,




UID No. HR0381

Pen drive Exhibit. DW-44, Copy of Order Exhibit. DW45 and also tendered

documents Mark-X8 Mark-X22 and photographs Exhibit. R1 to Exhibit. R14.

6. Thereafter, respondent evidence was closed by court order dated

29.7.2019.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

domestic incident report as well as the evidence adduced by the applicant

reflects in a very clear and telling manner that the applicant was subjected to

the violence within the term of domestic violence as defined in section 3 of the

Act. She has submitted that applicant was harassed and beaten by the

respondents. She has submitted that respondent No.1 being husband of

applicant is under obligation to maintain the applicant, but he is neglecting

deliberately to fulfill the said obligation. She has submitted that instead of

maintaining applicant the respondent No.1 inflicting physical, emotional and

verbal abuse upon her.

8. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent submitted

that it is the petitioner who has left the society of the respondents willfully and

without any reason. It was further argued that petitioner is quite able to




UID No. HR0381

maintain herself and therefore, she is also not liable for any maintenance or

any relief from this Court. It is further submitted that the respondent no.1 has

been granted divorce from the petitioner on the ground of cruelty which itself

shows that it is the respondent no.1 who is the victim of Domestic Violence at

the hands of the petitioner. Ld. Counsel for the respondent has also placed

on file following authorities:- Koushik Vs. Sau. Sangeeta Koushik Gharami

and others in Criminal Writ Petition No. 32 of 2014 In the High Court of

Judicature at Bombay Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. Sangeeta Saha Vs. Abhijit

Saha Petition (s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No (s). 2600-2601/2016,

Anoop and others Vs. Vani Shree Crl. Misc. No. M-36559-2013(O&M) date

of decision 5.8.2014.

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and has

gone through the case file carefully and minutely. In the considered view of

this Court, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief and she failed to prove

any allegation regarding domestic violence upon the respondents for the

following reasons:-

10. First of all, the petitioner has failed to prove Domestic violence




UID No. HR0381

at the hands of respondents to claim any remedy under the Act. Admittedly,

her marriage with respondent No.1 was solemnized in the year 4.2.2014 and

she remained in her matrimonial till 11.5.2014 only i.e. for three months and 7

days. As per her, the respondent no.1 and his family members were not

satisfied with the dowry and they treated her for more dowry demand and

used to give merciless beatings to the applicant for this. However, she has not

mentioned any date, month or year of such dowry demand or beatings or any

act of cruelty. There is no medical report available on the file to show that she

was given beatings by respondent no.1 and his family members. First time she

allegedly reported the matter on 22.12.2014 after seven months with the

Police vide FIR under Section 498-A and after two days one another FIR No.

376 of IPC of alleged continuous cruelty. The reason for such delay has not

been satisfactorily explained by the complainant. The delay of almost 7

months indicates towards manipulation and exaggeration of the story by the

complainant. It has not been mentioned that any Panchayat etc was held on

their behalf due to which delay took place and therefore, delay of 7 months is

fatal to the case of complainant.

11. The complainant in her complaint has mentioned regarding the




UID No. HR0381

demands of Rs. 35 lacs in para no.8. However, in her deposition she has not

stated any single word in this regard. Therefore, it is clear that she herself has

not supported her allegations regarding demand of dowry in her evidence. It

has been specifically deposed by the complainant in her cross-examination

that she went to her parental house two times from 5.2.2014 to 11.5.2014. As

per the contents of the petition, on the next date of marriage, she was

subjected to torture and therefore, it can be presumed that she has been telling

all her dowry allegations to her parents. However, none of his parents or

siblings has ever come before the court to corroborate her version. This itself

shows that her version regarding cruelty and domestic violence is not

supported by her parents as they never appeared to depose in support of her.

12. Further, her allegations regarding rape etc before marriage is not

relevant as the same has not been proved and moreover as per the judgment

Exhibit. DW11 dated 10.11.2015, he has been acquitted and it was held that

the conduct of complainant shows that she was a wiling party and somehow

their marriage could not be pulled on and she got registered the case against

the accused and it was not a rape rather it was consensual sex. Hence, the

allegations of the petitioner regarding rape etc has been proved to be false.




UID No. HR0381

13. Further, as per the judgment dated 4.1.2019 Exhibit. DW27, the

respondent no.1 has been granted divorce by the court of Shri Jagjit Singh,

Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Faridabad on the ground of cruelty

on the part of the petitioner. It was mentioned in the judgment that respondent

no.1 is entitled for decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. This itself

shows that it was the respondent no.1 who has been facing domestic violence

at the hands of the petitioner. It has been mentioned at Page No. 19 of the

judgment that an affidavit was given by the present petitioner during the

hearing of the bail application filed on 11.2.2015 where she admitted having

temperamental differences with the respondent no.1 and resultantly they were

residing separately since 11.5.2014. this further shows that the allegations of

domestic violence at the hands of respondents and the story of throwing the

petitioner out of the matrimonial house is bogus and false.

14. Further, the petitioner has failed to prove that she was having no

source of income at the time of filing of the petition. It has been mentioned in

the petition that she is having no source of income to maintain herself whereas

the respondent no.1 is earning handsome amount. However, the respondent




UID No. HR0381

has successfully proved that the petitioner has mentioned false fact regarding

having no source of income in her petition and also in the affidavit filed by

her during her deposition. Petitioner in her cross-examination specifically

admitted that she has been working since 2015 in three companies. She is

having degree of MCA. She stated that she is getting Rs. 20,000/- per month

from the company, where she is working. RW-8 Deepak Swami Manager,

Concentrix Indian Private Limited produced documents Exhibit. R17 to

Exhibit. R20 which shows that the petitioner was working with them from

21.10.2014 to 22.8.2015. This petition was filed on 11.5.2015. Therefore, it is

clear that the petitioner has deposed false facts regarding her no source of

income whereas she is earning even before the date of filing of the petition.

Similarly RW-1 brought records from Exhibit. R1 to Exhibit. R5 and as per

which she was earning Rs. 3 lacs per annum from her company. Similarly

RW-2 HRD, Accenture Solutions proved documents Exhibit. R6 to Exhibit.

R9 which shows that she is working her company from November 2015 to

February 2017 as IT Operator and was earning Rs. 22,000/- per months. RW-3

RW-3 brought her PF account Exhibit. R10. RW-4 brought her PF statement

account Exhibit. R11. RW-5 SO, ICICI Bank brought statement of account of

the complainant regarding her bank account Exhibit. R12. RW6 SO, Yes




UID No. HR0381

Bank also brought statement of account of the complainant regarding her bank

account Exhibit. R13 and Exhibit. R14. RW-7 Assistant Manager, Axis Bank

brought her statement of account of the complainant regarding her bank

account Exhibit. R15 and Exhibit. R16. In this manner, it is clearly proved

that the petitioner has deposed false facts before this court regarding her no

source of income, whereas from the date of filing of the petition till today she

is employed and has source of income to maintain herself.

15. In this manner, petitioner has failed to prove any allegations made

by her in the petition regarding domestic violence at the hands of respondents

and therefore, present petition is devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed.

File be consigned to the record after due compliance

Announced in Open Court:

3.9.2019 (Mohommad Sageer),Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad.

UID No. HR0381

Note: Certified that all the 14 pages of this judgment have been duly signed by me.

Mohommad SageerJudicial Magistrate Ist Class, FaridabadUID No. HR-0381


in the court of mohommad sageer judicial magistrate … … · punita wife of shri brijesh kumar...

Documents