BEFORE THE HON’BLE ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT AT

EGMORE,CHENNAI

M.P No. of 2021

AGAINST

D.V.C. No. 64 /2019

B.BALAJI
S/o. Mr. K.Bojarajan,
No. 45, 5 th street,
Murugappa Nagar,
Puzhuthivakkam
Chennai – 600 091. ... Petitioner/Respondent
VS
G.NISHANTHI
D/o. Mr. V.Govindasamy
No. 51/23, Varadharajan Street,
Vetri Nagar, Peravallur,
Pin Code – 600 082. ..Respondent/Petitioner

COUNTER FILED BY RESPONDENT

I, G.NISHANTHI, D/o. Mr. V.Govindasamy, Hindu, aged about 32 years,

residing at No. 51/23, Varadharajan Street, Vetri Nagar, Peravallur, Pin Code –
600 082 ,do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:-

1. I am the petitioner herein and the respondent in the above original

Petition and as such I am well acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case.

2. It is most respectfully submitted that a case in D.V.C. No. 64/2019 on

being registered, based on this respondent complaint Alleging verbal
abuse, physical abuse, domestic as well as economical violence ,dowry
harassment and deception by the petitioner along with his mother and
sister attracting offences U/s.18,19,20 and 22 of Protection of women
from Domestic Violence Act 2005.
3. The respondent raised a complaint before the social welfare officer
22.03.2019 having no other option to protect herself from the harassments
and mental agony meted out at the hands of the petitioner and his family
members. The protection officer after detailed enquiry only forwarded the
report to this Hon’ble court for further process in accordance with law.

4. The petitioner's version at Para 4 to 9 of his petition for discharge

claiming to be vindictive and that he is innocent is all false and this
respondent denies all averments made in the discharge petition except
those that are specifically admitted. . The contentions raised in this
petition cannot form any basis at pre-trial stage and as stated at the above
para, there is prima-facie material regarding the involved and overt act of
petitioner causing domestic violence and refusing conjugal obligations .

5. The contention of petitioner in the petition is misconceived and

misleading as if he has no connection to the happenings stated in the
complaint raised under Protection of women from Domestic violence Act
2005, can in no way advance his theory at pre-trial stage, As there being
specific charges raised u/s 18,19,20 and 22 of the said Protection of
women from Domestic violence Act 2005. The petitioner cannot sieve the
complainant by way of hyper technical approach to claim discharge and
petitioner cannot seek discharge by throwing a smokescreen to conceal
his guilt.

6. The facts presented by complainant/respondent set out various

contentions on presentation of documents are matters to be agitated
during trial and not at pre-trial stage and the reasons stated cannot be a
ground to consider discharge at this stage and Hence the question of pre-
trial discharge does not arise.

7. The petition is a deceitful device to evade the process of Law and to clog
the wheel of justice. The contentions raised in the petition alone would
not make out a case and the same is a matter to be gone through in a full
fledged trial and the question of discharge cannot be considered as the
petitioner is claiming for.
 Hence it is prayed that there being, no materials for consideration at pre
trail stage, the Hon’ble court may be pleased to dismiss the petition
directing the petitioner to stand trial and thus render justice.

Solemnly affirmed at chennai on this BEFORE ME

The 21st day of June 2022 and
Signed her name in my presence.
ADVOCATE :: CHENNAI
 BEFORE THE HON’BLE
ADDITIONAL MAHILA COURT
AT EGMORE,CHENNAI

M.P No. of 2021

AGAINST

D.V.C. No. 64 /2019

COUNTER FILED BY RESPONDENT

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
IN PERSON