IN THE COURT OF MS. SHUNALI GUPTA, LD.

PJFC SOUTH

DISTRICT, SAKET COURT, DELHI

MT CASES NO.328/2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

SANDHYA KUSHWAHA PETITIONER

VERSUS

MOHIT KUMAR RESPONDENT

REJOINDER TO THE REPLY FILED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITION U/S 125 C.R.P.C

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

PARA WISE REPLY TO THE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:

1. That contents of para no. 1 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely
false and vehemently denied. It is denied that the Respondent purchased a flat for the
Petitioner and spent Rs. 13,30,000/-. It is further denied that the petitioner kept her whole
family in this flat and said the reason was for safety because the respondent had taken no
objection. It is submitted that the flat was purchased by the Petitioner from the builder for
a consideration amount of Rs. 13,30,000/-. That the petitioner was not directly connected
to the builder, but on behalf of the petitioner, the respondent was dealing with the
purchase of the flat. Therefore, the petitioner also transferred Rs. 6 Lakh to the
respondent dated 19.09.2018 for making the payment of the above said flat. A Copy of
Bank statement is herein attached as Annexure -2. Further, it submitted that the 1 lakh
rupees was paid in advance on 24.06.2018 by the petitioner to the builder and remaining
payment was made in installments by the petitioner in cash and cheque. A copy of sale
agreement dated 24.06.2018 is herein attached as Annexure-3.

2. That contents of para 2 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied. It is totally denied that the present petition is not maintainable as
the petitioner has not come with clean hands before this Hon'ble Court. It is further
denied that she has mentioned the wrong facts regarding that their Ring Ceremony (sagai)
on 10.03.2019 on behalf of the Petitioner's family member a total of approximately 10
lakhs were spent in the marriage ceremony including Rs. 1,50,000/-given to Respondent
at the time of Ring Ceremony (Sagai), Rs. 2,50,000/ - given at the time of Marriage, Gold
Jewellery, domestic items, other items as stridhan etc. It is submitted that the marriage
was solemnized between the petitioner and respondent dated 12.02.2018 was a love
marriage, families of the petitioner and respondent were initially against the marriage.
Thereafter almost 2 years of solemnization of marriage, both the petitioner and the
respondent again got married with the consent of both the families with proper family
celebration and reception dated 01.02.2020. A copy of the marriage invitation card
printed for the purpose of marriage in 2020 dated 1.02.2020 is herein annexed as
ANNEXURE 4. It is further submitted that on behalf of the petitioner’s family, a total of
approximately 10 lakhs were spent in marriage including Rs.1,50,000 in cash given to
respondent at time of sagai and 2.5 lakhs in cash were given at the time of marriage
whereas gold jewelry, domestic items and other items as stridhan were also given during
the marriage which is in the possession of her in-laws till date.

3. That contents of para 3 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied. It is denied that after one month Petitioner used to behavior with
the Respondent in a very rough manner and always tried to dominate the Respondent in a
very uncivilized manner. Further it is denied that the Petitioner always used to humiliate
the Respondent in the presence of the neighbor, visitors, relatives and other friends and
family members on one pretext or the other as two nephews called the Respondent like
that "Chhote Papa '’. Again that Petitioner tortured respondent every moment that why
nephews call the Respondent Chhote Papa and used filth language as a like, ‘TU MERE
HUSBAND KI RAKHAL HAI KYA JO APNE BACHHO SE CHHOTE PAPA
BULWATI HAI". It is submitted that said that the Respondent and his Bhabhi Slesh had
an illegal physical relation whom the petitioner wanted to marry which led to mental
harassment of respondent’s brother and his higher alcohol intake caused his death.

4.That contents of para 4 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied. It is denied on 15.03.2020. During the period of Covid-2019
pandemic, the Petitioner left her matrimonial house and company of the Respondent after
quarrel with Respondent and his family members, packing a bag with all jewelry and her
clothes going away with another bike-rider. It is further denied that in the month of
August the Respondent went to the flat and met with the Petitioner and returned home
with the Petitioner. During the period of August last week of this month Respondent was
confirmed, that Petitioner transferred the flat to her brothers Ranjeet and Kaushal. It is
further denied that the respondent has constantly and regularly been harassed and tortured
by the petitioner and petitioner always loved money.It is submitted that during her stay
with the respondent the petitioner performed all her matrimonial duties as a true devoted
wife and daughter in law.it is further submitted that the respondent was an alcoholic and
he has gone to the extent of harassing petitioner and tried having anal sex with
respondent against her will.It is further submitted that petitioner has been treated with
utmost cruelty by the respondent and his family which has given her lifelong trauma.

5. That contents of para 5 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that the Petitioner always subjected the Respondent
and his family members to constant taunts, violent, insulting & contemptuous behavior,
would not discharge her matrimonial duties, would never respond positively to the love
and affection of the Respondent, behaved ill with the Respondent and his family
members and would even sexually starved the Respondent.It is further denied that
Respondent got very apprehended and disturbed he brought the misdeeds of the families,
everybody then condemned the same acts of the Petitioner. However, even then the
attitude of the Petitioner did not change.It is submitted that during her stay with the
respondent the petitioner performed all her matrimonial duties as a true devoted wife and
daughter in law.it is further submitted that the respondent was an alcoholic and he has
gone to the extent of harassing petitioner and tried having anal sex with respondent
against her will.It is further submitted that petitioner has been treated with utmost cruelty
by the respondent and his family which has given her lifelong trauma.

6.That contents of para 6 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied. It is denied that the Petitioner always tortured Respondent and
Petitioner’s behavior was bad for Respondent and his Bhabhi slesh (Sister-in-law). It is
denied that respondent’s brother expired with reason of death as brain hemorrhage
because petitioner said many allegation against his wife. It is further denied that at the
time of respondent’s brother ‘Tarami’’Petitioner and her family done the commitment that
"TUMHARE GHAR ME HAR KOI MARGEA KOI NAI BACHEGA". It is denied that
due to this reason respondent’s father is shocked and attacked due hypertension and high
BP which caused him paralyzed and led to his death It is submitted that death of the
respondent’s brother happened after he got to know about the illicit relationship between
the respondent and the respondent’s bhabhi namely slesh,whom the petitioner wanted to
marry. Thereafter,the respondent's brother's alcohol intake increased alot which led to
occurrence of his death. It is further submitted that father of respondent had a medical
history of high blood pressure and hypertension and due to cause of death of respondent's
brother his father could not emotionally bear the big loss of the family and on the day of
tehravi the petitioner’s father due to high blood pressure suffered a paralysis attack led to
his death.

7.That contents of para 7 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that the Petitioner was leisure loving and work
shirking lady Who had no concern or knowledge of the Household chores and on many
occasions, the Respondent was left alone in the kitchen to prepare food for the entire
family including the Petitioner. Further denied that the Petitioner would deliberately
pretend sometimes head ache, stomach ache or body ache or cramps in all parts of the
body and closed herself in bathroom and call the 112 after that arrival the lady police and
understand a situation. It is submitted that the respondent maintained all the relationship
bequeathed on her by marriage with utmost respect,dignity and love.Further submitted
that petitioner handled all her responsibilities of being an ideal daughter in law in her
matrimonial home.she used to clean and cook for the respondent and her family.

8.That contents of para 8 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that the That the Petitioner working in a saloon in
Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi and earning 20,000/- per month. It is denied that Without taking
any permission from Respondent the petitioner went out with her friends circle and came
late at night. It is further denied that Petitioner never behaved with the respondent as her
life partner and did never even tried to cultivate any love and affection, confidence in
him. It is submitted that petitioner was getting her training at saloon and she never had
means or luxury to go out even for meal.It is further submitted that it is totally incorrect
to say that respondent used to party till late at night.

9.That contents of para 9 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that the Petitioner did not used to do any household
work and would not even prepare meal for the Respondent and his family. Further denied
that the Respondent was always forced to have his lunch from out-side.It is also denied
that the Respondent always himself and with the help of family members, relations and
also the parents of the Petitioner tried to make the Petitioner understand for improving
her behavior and ways however,these efforts always failed. It is also further denied that
the Petitioner used to speak very rashly and arrogantly to the Respondent about the
Respondent as well as about his parents.It is submitted that the respondent maintained all
the relationship bequeathed on her by marriage with utmost respect,dignity and
love.Further submitted that petitioner handled all her responsibilities of being an ideal
daughter in law in her matrimonial home.she used to clean and cook for the respondent
and her family.

10. That contents of para 10 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that it was a regular features of the Petitioner to
create tension in the house and to rush to her family members on one pretext or the other
and the Respondent had been going to her and bringing her back to the matrimonial home
to save the marriage of the parties. It is denied that the Petitioner and her family members
being old orthodox Hindus revered the insinuation of a joint family but the Petitioner and
her family was the way to live in a modern society and the though process of the
Respondent and his family members was backward/traditional. It is further denied that
the life of Respondent has become a hell.It is submitted that it was the petitioner who was
subjected to all kind of atrocities,cruelities,mental and physical harassment by the
respondent and his family.Therefore the respondent is not entitled to be granted relief
through this petition which is under reply.

11.That contents of para 11 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that That the Petitioner used to come back late in the
evening by 11.00 pm from his work and late night party with her boyfriends and friends.It
is denied thatPetitioner used to sleep in without respondent and locked his room at night
and Respondent used to sleep another room did not give any conjugal right to the
Respondent. Further denied that the Petitioner is threatening that she will commit suicide
if the Respondent touched her for love and loving relationship. Also denied that lastly
may 2022 Respondent purchased a bike and saved the money Rs. 2 lakh in an Almirah
but Petitioner theft the money and run away with her boy friends. It is submitted that It is
submitted that during her stay with the respondent the petitioner performed all her
matrimonial duties as a true devoted wife and daughter in law.it is further submitted that
the respondent was an alcoholic and he has gone to the extent of harassing petitioner and
tried having anal sex with respondent against her will.It is further submitted that
petitioner has been treated with utmost cruelty by the respondent and his family which
has given her lifelong trauma. It also submitted that respondent has made false allegation
on petitioner about theft as she has good moral values and she cant get indulged in such
cheap things like theft.

12..That contents of para 12 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that the Respondent tried his level best to reconcile
the matter and for that purpose he never went to his in-laws and is denied that the
telephone calls was not attended Petitioner said to the Respondent enjoy with her boy
friends.
13.That contents of para 13 of the preliminary objections of the reply are absolutely false
and vehemently denied.It is denied that she failed to perform her matrimonial duties.It is
further denied that the he Petitioner developed the habit of quarreling with the
Respondent and his family members on very petty issues.It is submitted that hat the
content of of the petition are wrong and hence denied.It si submitted that the respondent
maintained all the relationships bequeathed on her by marriage with utmost respect,
dignity and love.Further, the respondent handled all the responsibilities of being an ideal
daughter-in-law in her matrimonial home. But her hopes and dreams were soon shattered
as she found out that her in-laws did not share the same affection and respect for her as
she did. It is further submitted that after a few days of marriage, the petitioner and her
in-laws including father-in-law Surendra Bhatt, mother-in-law Devi, sister-in-law
Manisha (Nanad) & Slesh (jethani) started harassing the Respondent on one pretext or the
other. Further submitted that that the petitioner started having various quarrels with her
husbands because of his alcoholism and illicit physical relationship /extra marital affairs
with Respondent's jethani. That, the same was discovered by Respondent Jhethani’s
husband also, and Jethani’s husband died in a shock. Therefore, the illicit extra marital
affairs of respondent with her Jethani caused mental torture to the petitioner. The
altercations between the Petitioner and Respondent often too ugly turns and ended in
gruesome verbal or physical assault on the petitioner. That the Jethani of the petitioner
used to say that the respondent is also the father of her (Jethani's) younger son and that
she will marry the present respondent(Mohit). For this reason, the petitioner's Jethani
used to beat and harass the petitioner and the husband of the petitioner also used to take
sides of his bhabhi/respondent's Jethani

PARAWISE REPLY TO THE REPLY ON MERITS

1. That the contents of para 1 to 9 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied
that the marriage was solemnized in a very simple manner without giving dowry articles
and only a few articles were given in the marriage. It further denied that the Respondent
gave a some of Rs. 1,50,000 to the Petitioner for marriage expenses. It is submitted that
marriage was solemnized as per the demand of the respondent and the respondent’s
family. It is further submitted that the petitioner family beared all the expenses of the
marriage and spent approx 10 lakhs in the marriage. However the Petitioner family gave
1.5 lakh at the time of ring ceremony & Rs. 2.5 lakh at time of marriage along with gold
jewelry, domestic items and other items of stridhan. A copy of tent house booking receipt
dated 01.02.2020are herein attached as Annexure-1

2. That the contents of para 10 of the reply are totally false, fabricated and incorrect and
hence denied in totality. It is submitted that all the gold jewellery and whatever was given
as stridhan during the time of marriage were all kept by the in-laws of the Petitioner and
has never been given to the Petitioner and are still in the possession of the in-laws of the
Petitioner.

3. That the contents of para 11 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is submitted
that the petitioner maintained all the relationships bequeathed on her by marriage with
utmost respect, dignity and love. However soon after marriage in-laws of petitioner
including Respondent/Petitioner's husband Mohit father-in-law Surendra Bhat, mother-in-
law Devi, sister-in-law Manisha (Nanad) & Slesh (Jethani) started harassing the
Petitioner on one pretext or the other and were very cruel towards the petitioner and
petitioner was victim of all these cruelty by in-laws.

4. That the contents of para 12 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
the Respondent purchased a flat for the Petitioner and spent Rs. 13,30,000/-. It is
submitted that the flat was purchased by the Petitioner from the builder for a
consideration amount of Rs. 13,30,000/-. That the petitioner was not directly connected to
the builder, but on behalf of the petitioner, the respondent was dealing with the purchase
of the flat. Therefore, the petitioner also transferred Rs. 6 Lakh to the respondent dated
19.09.2018 for making the payment of the above said flat. A Copy of Bank statement is
herein attached as Annexure -2. Further, it submitted that the 1 lakh rupees was paid in
advance on 24.06.2018 by the petitioner to the builder and remaining payment was made
in installments by the petitioner in cash and cheque. A copy of sale agreement dated
24.06.2018 is herein attached as Annexure-3.

5. That the contents of para 13 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
the petitioners used to behave in rough and dominant manner with the respondent. It is
further denied that the Petitioner always used to humiliate the Respondent in the
presences of the Neighbour, visitors, relatives and other friends and family members and
that she embarrassed the respondent for being called chhote papa by his nephews. It is
also denied that she use filth language as a like, ‘TU MERE HUSBAND KI RAKHAL
HAI KYA JO APNE BACCHO SE CHHOTE PAPA BULWATI HAI’’. It is again denied
that petitioner always used to torture the respondent and petitioner never had bad
behavior towards the respondent and her Bhabhi and the allegation of death of
respondent's brother was false on petitioner. It is also denied that petitioner and her
family made the commitment that ‘TMARE GHAR ME HAR KOI MAREGA KOI
NAHI BACHEGA’’.It is submitted that the Petitioner maintained all the relationship
bequeathed on her by marriage with utmost dignity, respect and love. It is further
submitted that Husband has also been and is still having an illicit relationship/affair with
his Bhabhi/Petitioner's Jethani. Further, it is submitted that that the same was too
discovered by Petitioner's Jethani's husband also, but subsequently Petitioner's Jethani's
husband died.

6. That the contents of para 14 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
the two nephews called the Respondent "Chhote Papa" and Petitioner torture every
moment why they call the Respondent as ‘Chhote Papa’’and used filth language as alike,
"TU MERE HUSBAND KI RAKHAL HAI KYA JO APNE BACHHO SE CHHOTE
PAPA BULWATI HAI" which caused embarrassment to the family and the respondent. It
is submitted that petitioners husband is also the father of her Jethani's younger son and
that she will marry the the respondent Mohit.

7. That the contents of para 15 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
the Petitioner used to come back late in the evening by 11.00 pm from his work and from
late-night party with her boyfriends and friends. It is denied that Petitioner used to sleep
in without respondent and locked his room at night and Respondent used to sleep in
another room did not give any conjugal right to the Respondent. It is submitted that
Respondent used to give milk with sleeping pills mixed into it to the Petitioner at night so
as to hide his illicit relationship with his Bhabhi/Petitioner's Jethani.

8. That the contents of para 16 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is further
denied that at the time of Respondent's brother "Tarami" Petitioner and her family done
the committed that "TUMHARE GHAR ME HAR KOI MARGEA KOI NAI
BACHEGA". It is also denied that Respondent's father shocked and attack HTN(High
BP) about this reason stoke of the Respondent's father and his father life was damage
attack to paralyze disease. It is submitted that further Petitioner's father-in-law also used
to molest her, come in front of her without clothes and used to come into her bathroom
while the Petitioner was taking bath and used to sexually assault her which led to harm of
mental health of the petitioner.

9. That the contents of para 17 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is further
denied that Last may 2022 Respondent purchased a bike and saved the money Rs.2 lakh
in an Almirah but Petitioner theft the al money and run away her boy friends. When The
Respondent was came to the home and seen the almirah was opened and theft Rs. 2
lakh.It is further submitted that the Petitioner when once told to her husband, the
Respondent hereinabove that she will make a complainant t o the police regarding all the
harassment, then the Respondent locked the Petitioner in a room, and then came back
with two of his maternal uncles and threatened to kill her.

10. That the contents of para 18 and 19 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is
further denied that it is a false complaint against the Respondent and his family members.
It is further denied that it is a false complaint against the Respondent and his family
members.
11. That the contents of para 20 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is further
denied that the Petitioner is a makeup artist and working a saloon in Lajpat Nagar, New
Delhi and earning 20,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Petitioner does not have
any substantial source of income and is totally dependent upon her parents for every
meagre expense of her, owing to which the Petitioner is facing extreme economic
hardship.

12. That the contents of para 21 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
Respondent is having a private job and earns only 15,000/-per month and she has no
source of income. It is submitted that the Respondent /Petitioner's husband is having a
job at a Private Hospital, where from he earns handsome salary, thereby making him
sufficiently capable/has sufficient means to maintain the Petitioner.

13. That the contents of para 22 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
the respondent never demanded anything at any point of time from the petitioner and her
family members.

14. That the contents of para 23 of the reply are wrong and hence denied. It is denied that
the Petitioner is a makeup artist and working a saloon in Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi and
earning 20,000/- per month. It is submitted that she has no job and is unable to maintain
her and bear her expenses.

15. That the contents of para no. 24 of the reply are not disputed in nature and are matter
of records, hence need no reply.

16. That the contents of para no. 25 & 26 are matter of record and hence need no reply.