IN THE COURT OF SH.

PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT

(SHAHDARA), KARKARDOOMA COURT, DELHI
Maintenance Petition No. ……………of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF :-

1.Smt. Tayyaba Asad

W/o Sh. Imran Ansari
D/o Asad Ullah

2.Mohd. Zayaan
S/o Sh. Imran Ansari
Both R/o H.No.C-40, 3rd Floor,
C-Block, New Jafrabad,
Shahdara, North-East Delhi,
Delhi-110032.

…Petitioners

Versus

Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari (Husband)

S/o Lt. Sh. Habib Ansari
R/o:- 4/13, Kothi Darul Uns,
Dodhpur Road Near Welding Wali Gali,
& Paan Wali Kothi, Aligarh 202002.
M. No- 8077395238
…Respondent

P.S.: JAFRABAD
DISTRICT: SHAHDARA

PETITION U/S 125 CR.P.C. FOR GRANTING MAINTENANCE

ALLOWANCE ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER
RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

1. That the marriage of the petitioner no.1 was

solemnized with the respondent on 21.03.2022

according to Muslim rites and ceremonies with

simple manner at Vasundra, Green Aura

Nambardar, Ghaziabad, U.P. it is pertinent to

mention that the marriage was solemnized in

very simple manner and one child namely

Mohd. Zayaan (baby boy) was born out on

22.05.2023 from their wedlock.

2. That the parents of the petitioner no.1 spent

huge amount in the marriage beyond their

capacity and status but even then, the

respondent and his family members treated the

petitioner no.1 with cruelty and the greed of

dowry of the respondent and his family

members never ended, as a consequence of

which the condition of the petitioner no.1

kept on deteriorating day by day. The

 respondent never took care of the petitioner

no.1 and the respondent along-with his family

members made the life of the petitioner no.1

as a hell.

3. That the respondent firstly sent his

marriage purposal (Rishta) to the petitioner

no.1 in the year 2018 but at that time the

petitioner’s parent rejected the marriage

purposal of the respondent because at that

time he was struggling for his job. It is

pertinent to mention that the respondent

always influenced the petitioner no.1 by his

actions that he will give interview for USA

and Canada profiles and he will soon clear

the interviews so he again sent his marriage

purposal to the petitioner no.1 and married

her by saying that “MAI USA AND CANADA KI

JOBS KE LIYE INTERVIEW DE RAHA HU, AUR MERI

JOB JALDI LAG JAYEGI TOH HUM SHADI KAR LETE

HAI AUR SETTLED HO JATE HAI”. It is further

 pertinent to mention that the respondent

bluffed the petitioner no.1 to get married

with him.

4. That the respondent made fake promises to

the petitioner no.1 that he will soon settle

in abroad and he will not live in Aligarh

with the petitioner after getting married.

It is pertinent to mention that the

respondent always influences by saying these

above-mentioned things to get married with

the petitioner no.1.

5. That on 24.03.2022 the respondent’s mother

i.e., mother-in-law of the petitioner no.1

taunted the petitioner no.1 by saying that

“PEHNAVINI KE KAPDE ACHE NAHI LAI, HUMARE

YAHA KOI ESE KAPDE NAHI PEHNTA”. It is

pertinent to mention that the respondent’s

mother was not happy or satisfied with

petitioner as well as with the dowry

 articles and the family members of the

respondent are married despite this fact

that the married sisters of the respondent

continuously residing at the matrimonial

house of the petitioner no.1 along-with

their respective husbands and kids and

collectively harassed the petitioner no.1

without any just and cost and the other

family members of the respondent

collectively taunted the petitioner by

saying that “YEAH HUMARI AMMI AUR BHAI KA

GHAR HAI HUM YAHA JAB TAK CHAE TAB TAK

RAHENGE TUM BUS APNA KAAM KARO”.

6. That on 07.04.2022 the respondent’s sister

taunted the petitioner no.1 for not to bring

sufficient dowry and always influenced the

respondent along-with the other family

members that the petitioner no.1 is not

deserved to marry with my brother i.e.,

respondent. It is pertinent to mention that

 the respondent’s sister abused and extended

threat to the petitioner no.1 by saying that

“TUJHE TOH MAIN BILKUL PASAND NHI KARTI OR

TUJHSE TOH SHAADI HUMNE DAHEZ KE LIYE KARI

THI PAR TU KUCH NAHI LEKAR AAI, AB TUJHE

MAIN ISS GHR MAIN NAHI REHNE DUNGI”. It is

further pertinent to mention that the

respondent’s sister again extended threat by

saying that “KI MERA DEVER (“FORMER MAYOR OF

ALIGARH” KA DOST HAI JISKI BAHUT JAN PEHCHAN

HAI MAIN APNE DEVER SE KEH KAR USKE DOST KO

BULWA LUNGI OR TUJHE OR TERE GHARWALO KO

PITWA DUNGI OR TUJHE ISS GHAR SE NIKALWA

DUNGI”.

7. That on 06.09.2022 the petitioner no.1 was

in her matrimonial house i.e., Aligarh so

the respondent and his family members

taunted the petitioner no.1 by saying that

“AAGYI DELHI WALI AB GHAR KA MAHOL KHARAB

HOGA AUR HUME ISE JHELNA PADEGA, AGRA WALA

(OLD RISHTA) BHI BACH GAYA ISSE, USKI KISMAT

AACHI THI LEKIN HUM FAS GAYE ISKE SATH”. It

is pertinent to mention that all the

respondent and his family members did not

like the petitioner no.1 and did not accept

the petitioner no.1 as their daughter- in -

law and sister-in-law and in the month of

September 2022 end the respondent’s family

members behavior towards the petitioner no.1

was very aggressive and dominating and all

the family members of the respondent had

thrown the petitioner no.1 along-with her

bag outside the petitioner no.1 matrimonial

house by saying that “YAHA TU RAHENE KE

LAYAK NAHI HAI APNE GHR DELHI CHALI JAA AUR

VAHA RAHE” and The respondent mother was

also taunted and abuse the petitioner no.1

for not to bring sufficient dowry and

further the respondent mother taunted her

son i.e., respondent that “YEAH LADKI AACHI

 NAHI HAI TERE LIYE TU ISKO CHOR DE, DHEJ

YEAH LAYI NAHI BUS MUH UTHKE AAGYI HAI”.

8. That after this incident the petitioner no.1

had been living with her parents in her

parental home for 4 months and the family of

the respondent continuously forbid the

respondent go to the parental house of the

petitioner no.1 and take her back with the

respondent (him) by saying that “TU KYU JAA

RAHA HAI USKE GHAR, USKO AANA HOGA TOH KHUD

AAJYEGI AB TOH SHADI HO GYI HAI KITNE DIN

APNE MAYKE MAI RAHE LEGI HUM BHI TOH DEKHE”

and the respondent agreed with his family

members discussion and the respondent always

obey his family members decision and the

respondent do not take care of the

petitioner no.1 emotions, feelings and her

decision. Thereafter the petitioner no.1 own

took the decision that she will go to her

matrimonial house and ready to live with the

 respondent and with his other family members

with this thought that “KABHI TOH MUJHE

ACCEPT KAR LENGE AUR MUJHE APNA GHAR AISEY

HI NAHI CHORNA CHAIYE AUR NAHI RISHTE TODNA

CHAIYE”. So, after 4 months the petitioner

no.1 went back to her matrimonial house and

lived with her in-laws i.e., all the family

members of the respondent but after this the

respondent’s family members behavior had

changed and getting worsted with the

petitioner no.1. Initially 2023 few months

were good the petitioner no.1 bear all the

taunts and the respondent and his family

members rude and arrogant behavior for the

sake of her marriage.

9. That on 25.04.2023 the respondent’ sisters

condemns to the petitioner no.1 by saying

that “TUNE MERE BHAI KO FASA LIYA HAI, TU

ACHI LADKI NAHI HAI OR TERA CHARACTER BHI

ACHA NAHI HAI, HUM TOH PEHLE HI MANA KARRHEY

THEY ISSE SHAADI MAT KARO, TU ISS GHAR MAI

REHNE KE LAYAK NAHI HAI”. It is pertinent to

mention here that the respondent’s sisters

used to defame the petitioner no.1 by using

derogatory and abusive words and because all

these things the petitioner no.1 effected

mentally and emotionally. That on the very

same day the respondent mother pushed the

petitioner no.1 by saying that “SAHI KEH

RAHI HAI MERI BETI KI TU IS GHAR KE LAYAK

NAHI HAI, EK TOH TU KUCH LEKE NAHI AAYI AUR

TUJHE HUME APNE GHR MAI RAKHNA PAD RAHA

HAI”. It is further pertinent to mention

that all the family members of the

respondent taunted the petitioner no.1 for

all the small things or for dowry articles

and make quarrel with the petitioner no.1 on

the very petty issues. all the family

members of the respondents directly and

 indirectly force the petitioner no.1 to leave

her matrimonial home.

10. That on 25.05.2023 the petitioner no.2

was born and the respondent and his other

family members get the petitioner no.1 to

the government hospital, Aligarh for her

delivery and the petitioner no.1 got her

delivery done at government hospital,

Aligarh and in that hospital the petitioner

no.1 proper treatment and care was not done.

The hospital staff and interns were there

for the petitioner no.1 treatment but not

the doctors. At the time of delivery, the

petitioner no.1 was very anxious and

mentally harassed by all the family members

of respondent.

11. That soon after the delivery of the

petitioner no.1 and the respondent mutually

decided that the petitioner no.1 will go to

 her parental home, Delhi for a month for the

further recovery and treatment and the

respondent was agreed but when the family

members of the respondent get to know about

this the respondent’s family started

quarreled with the petitioner no.1 by saying

that “BUS TUNE HI THODA BACHA PAIDA KIYA HAI

PURI DUNIYA MAI JO TUJHE AB MAYKE JANA HAI,

HOSPITAL MAI KHARCHA KARWA DIYA AB JANE KA

BHI KHARCHA KARWAYEGI”. Thereafter the

respondent got influenced by all the family

members of the respondent and the respondent

did not talk with the petitioner no.1 and

even not show his love and affections towards

his newly born child.

1.That on 29.05.2023 all the family members of

the respondent continuously taunted the

petitioner no.1 for the food by saying that

“KITNA KHAYEGI YEAH, DIN BHAR KHANA KHATI

HAI, HUM TOH SIRF MASSOR KI DAAL KHATE THEY”.

 The condition of the petitioner no.1 became

pitiable in her matrimonial home as no one

was taking care of her in her matrimonial

house even she was not allowed to have proper

meals also the sisters of the respondent

regularly check the petitioner no.1 fridge on

her separate floor while the petitioner no.1

eat anything from that fridge and taunted the

petitioner no.1 by saying that “YEAH FRUITS

SIRF TERE LIYE NAHI RAKHE HAI HUM BHI HAI

GHAR MAI KHANE WALE”.

12. That on 30.05.2023 the respondent other

family members extended threat to the

petitioner no.1 for not to bringing

insufficient dowry and also because of the

fact that the greed of dowry of all family

members of the respondent never ended and

they kept on harassing the petitioner no.1

and used to harass and beat her. The illegal

demands raised by the respondent’s family

 members were so much that the petitioner no.1

was not allowed by the respondent’s family

members in her matrimonial house.

13. That thereafter the petitioner no.1 was

compelled to do all the household work alone

and was confined to her matrimonial home.

She was not allowed to talk to her family

members and other relatives even on

telephone and treated her in her matrimonial

home as a slave.

14. That on 02.06.2023 the petitioner no.1 was

compiled to leave the matrimonial house

because of the above said reason mentioned in

the petition hence, the petitioner no.1 left

her matrimonial house in her bear apparel

having the petitioner no.2 in her lap along-

with her mother and since then she is

residing at her parental home and the

respondent has not taken care of his minor

 child and from the date of separation the

respondent had not called and asked the

petitioner no.1 about petitioner no.2. It is

pertinent to mention that the respondent is

not interested in his matrimonial life and

the respondent does not even care about the

petitioner no.1 and the petitioner no.2 i.e.

the minor child. The respondent had not sent

single penny to the petitioner no.1 and for

her and her and petitioner no.2.

15. That the year 2022 when the petitioner

no.1 was married to the respondent since then

all the family members of the respondent

misbehave and quarreled with the petitioner

no.1 and abuse her in the filthiest language

and defaming her.

16. That due to behavior of the respondent and

his family members, the petitioner no.1

suffered acute mental depression and she kept

 on tolerating the said behavior only in the

hope that better sense would prevail over the

respondents and things will be nice in future

but all in vain.

17. That the respondent and his family members

have also illegally retained the Stridhan,

jewellery and gift items of the petitioner

no.1. The respondent and his other family

members have refused to return the same

inspite of repeated requests and demands made

by the petitioner no.1. The respondent has

threatened the petitioner no.1 many a times.

Even the other family members of respondent

used to support and encourage the respondent

and his brother for their criminal deeds and

they also used to threaten the petitioner

no.1. The petitioner avoided to lodge any

complaint anywhere with the hope that better

sense would prevail over the respondent and

 his family members and she would lead a happy

matrimonial life.

18. That the condition of the petitioner no.1

became pitiable in her matrimonial home as no

one was taking care of her in her matrimonial

house even she was not allowed to have proper

meals.

19. That due to behavior of the respondent

family members, the petitioner no.1 suffered

acute mental depression and she kept on

tolerating the said behavior only in the hope

that better sense would prevail over the

respondent and his parents and things will be

nice in future but all in vain.

20. That the respondent has also not made any

provision for the maintenance of the

petitioners despite having sufficient means

which is gross negligence of law. The

petitioner no.1 has no property in her name

 and has no source of income and she is

totally dependent upon her parents. She is

unable to maintain herself and her minor

child as she has no knowledge of craft and is

suffering from mental and physical harassment

by the respondent and his family members.

That the petitioner no.1 is the only

caretaker for the petitioner no.2 and the

petitioner no.1 is unable to go for any job

by leaving behind the petitioner no.2 alone

as the petitioner no.2 is infant baby of only

3 months old.

21. That the respondent is a man of means and

able-bodied person. He is well educated. He

is working as a Software Engineer in IBM at

Noida. The income of the respondent is Rs.

1,50,000/-per month approx. and he is

leading a luxurious life. The respondent

has not paid a single penny to the

petitioner no.1 and the petitioner no.2 i.e.

 the minor child and had not provided any

maintenance and totally neglected and

refused to maintain the petitioner no.1 and

her minor child.

22. That the petitioners require a sum of Rs.

70,000/- per month from the respondent for

maintenance such as kitchen expenses,

clothing, day to day household affairs,

diet, medicines etc. as per the status of

the respondent since she is unable to

maintain herself and petitioner no 2.

23. That the petitioners are only dependent

on the income of the respondent and the

respondent has no other liability except to

maintain the petitioners and he has flatly

refused to maintain the petitioners.

24. That the petitioner no.1 submits that

having regard to the respondent’s own income

and having regard to the conduct of the

 respondent, and requirements of the

petitioner, a maintenance of a sum of Rs.

70,000/- per month is just and proper

amount.

25. That the petitioner is residing at H. No

C-40, 3rd Floor-Block, New Jafrabad, Shahdara,

North-East Delhi, Delhi-110032, within the

territorial jurisdiction of this Hon'ble

Court, hence this Hon'ble Court has got the

jurisdiction to try, entertain and decide

the present petition.

PRAYER

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:

a). Pass an order in favour of the petitioners

and against the respondent thereby directing

the respondent to pay Rs. 70,000/- per month

to the petitioners towards her maintenance

from the date of filing the present petition;

b). Pass an order in favour of the petitioner and

against the respondent thereby directing the

respondent to pay an amount of Rs.30,000/-

towards the litigation expenses;

c). Pass any other or further relief in favour of

the petitioner, which this Hon'ble court may

deem fit and proper, in the interest of

justice.

PETITIONER NO.1
DELHI
DATED: THROUGH

SIDDIQUI & ASSOCIATES

Advocates

VERIFICATION:

I, the above-named petitioner state on solemn

affirmation that the contents of para no.1 to 25

of the petition are true and correct to my

personal knowledge as well as believed to be true

on the information received by me. Last para is

prayer to this Hon’ble Court.

 Verified at Delhi on This 28tH day of August

2023.

PETITIONER
 IN THE COURT OF SH. PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT
(SHAHADRA), KARKARDOOMA COURT, DELHI
Maintenance Petition No. ……………of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Smt. Tayyaba Asad & Ors. …Petitioners

Versus

Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari …Respondent

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 125(3) Cr.P.C. ON BEHALF

OF THE PETITIONER FOR GRANT OF INTERIM MAINTENANCE
ALLOWANCES.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the accompanying petition under section

125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance

allowances has been filed by the petitioner

no.1 before this Hon'ble Court, which is

pending adjudication. The contents of the

same may kindly be treated here as part and

parcel of this application, as the same are

not being reproduced herein for the sake of

brevity.
2. That the respondent has also not made any

provision for the maintenance of the

petitioners despite having sufficient means

which is gross negligence of law. The

petitioner no.1 has no property in her name

and has no source of income and she is

totally dependent upon her parents. She is

unable to maintain herself and her minor

child as she has no knowledge of craft and is

suffering from mental and physical harassment

by the respondent and his family members.

That the petitioner no.1 is the only

caretaker for the petitioner no.2 and the

petitioner no.1 is unable to go for any job

by leaving behind the petitioner no.2 alone

as the petitioner no.2 is infant baby of only

3 months old.

3. That the respondent is a man of means and

able-bodied person. He is well educated. He

is working as a Software Engineer in IBM at

 Noida. The income of the respondent is Rs.

1,50,000/-per month approx. and he is

leading a luxurious life. The respondent

has not paid a single penny to the

petitioner no.1 and the petitioner no.2 i.e.

the minor child and had not provided any

maintenance and totally neglected and

refused to maintain the petitioner no.1 and

her minor child.

4. That the petitioners require a sum of Rs.

70,000/- per month from the respondent for

maintenance such as kitchen expenses,

clothing, day to day household affairs,

diet, medicines etc. as per the status of

the respondent since she is unable to

maintain herself and petitioner no 2.

5. That the petitioners are only dependent on

the income of the respondent and the

respondent has no other liability except to

 maintain the petitioners and he has flatly

refused to maintain the petitioners.

6. That the petitioner no.1 submits that having

regard to the respondent’s own income and

having regard to the conduct of the

respondent, and requirements of the

petitioner, a maintenance of a sum of Rs.

70,000/- per month is just and proper

amount.

PRAYER:

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed

that this Hon'ble Court may kindly pass an interim

order thereby directing the respondent to pay

Rs.70,000/- per month to the petitioners till the

final disposal of the accompanying petition u/s

125 Cr.P.C. and respondent further directed to pay

a sum of Rs.50,000/-as litigation expenses, in the

interest of justice.
 Any other relief(s), which this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit and proper, under the facts and

circumstances of the case, may kindly be passed,

in favour of the applicants/petitioners and

against the respondent.

PETITIONER NO.1
DELHI
DATED: THROUGH

SIDDIQUI & ASSOCIATES

Advocates
 IN THE COURT OF SH.PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT
(SHAHADRA), KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
Maintenance Petition No. ……………of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Smt. Tayyaba Asad & Ors. …Petitioners

Versus

Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari …Respondent

AFFIDAVIT

I, Tayyaba Asad W/o Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari

D/o Asad Ullah R/o H.No.C-40, 3RD Floor, C-Block,
New Jafrabad, Shahdara, North-East Delhi, Delhi-
110032., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as
under:-
1. That I am the petitioner no.1 in the above

noted case and am fully conversant with the

facts thereof and as such I am competent to

swear this affidavit.

2. That I have filed the accompanying petition

under section 125 of Cr.P.C. for grant of

maintenance alongwith application for grant

of interim maintenance before this Hon'ble

Court. The contents of the same may kindly be

 read as part and parcel of this affidavit,

which are not reproduced herein for the sake

of brevity.

3. That the accompanying petition as well as

application have been drafted by my counsel

under my instruction and contents thereof

have been read over and explained to me in

vernacular, which I admit to be correct.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION: -

Verified at Delhi on this 28th day of August,

2023, that the contents of my aforesaid

affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge

and belief and nothing has been concealed

therefrom.

DEPONENT
 IN THE COURT OF SH. PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT
(SHAHDARA), KARKARDOOMA COURT, DELHI
Maintenance Petition No. ……………of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Smt. Tayyaba Asad & Ors. …Petitioners

Versus

Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari …Respondent

MEMO OF PARTIES

1.Smt. Tayyaba Asad

W/o Mohd. Imran Ansari
D/o Asad Ullah

1. Mohd. Zayaan
S/o Sh. Imran Ansari

Both R/o H.No.C-40, 3rd Floor,

C-Block, New Jafrabad,
Shahdara, North-East Delhi,
Delhi-110032.
…Petitioners
Versus

Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari (Husband)

S/o Lt. Sh. Habib Ansari
R/o:- 4/13, Kothi Darul Uns,
Dodhpur Road Near Welding Wali Gali,
& Paan Wali Kothi, Aligarh 202002.
M. No- 8077395238 …Respondent
 PETITIONER NO.1
DELHI
DATED: THROUGH
SIDDIQUI & ASSOCIATES
Advocates
 IN THE COURT OF SH. PRINCIPAL JUDGE FAMILY COURT
(SHAHADRA), KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
Maintenance Petition No. ……………of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Smt. Tayyaba Asad & Ors. …Petitioners

Versus

Shri. Mohd. Imran Ansari …Respondent

I N D E X

Sr.No. Particulars Pages Court

Fees
1. Memo of Parties

2. Petition under section

125 Cr.P.C. for grant of
maintenance allowance.

3. Application for grant of

interim maintenance
allowance.

4. Affidavit of petitioner
along-with Income and
Expenditure affidavit.

5 List of documents
alongwith documents

6. Vakalatnama
 PETITIONER NO.1
DELHI
DATED: THROUGH

SIDDIQUI & ASSOCIATES

Advocates