BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT OF MS.

NIDHI SINGH,
LD. MM, SAKET DISTRICT COURT, NEW DELHI
CC NO. 5463 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF:
MADHVI DEVI …COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
KUNDAN SINGH BHAKUNI …RESPONDENTS
PS KALKAJI
LEGAL AID CASE AIDED BY DLSA

REJOINDER FILED ON BEHALF OF THE

COMPLAINANT TO THE WRITTEN STATEMENT
FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

At the outset, the Complainant denies all the averments made in

the Written Statement filed on behalf of Respondent to the
extent they are contrary or inconsistent with the contents of the
Complaint filed by the Complainant or the present Rejoinder.
Nothing contained in the Written Statement should be deemed to
have been admitted, save as expressly stated herein. The
contents of the Complaint and the Affidavit-in-Support thereof
may be read as part and parcel of the present Rejoinder and
hence are not being repeated herein for sake of brevity.

Reply to Preliminary Objections/ Submissions:

REJOINDER TO TRUE FACTS:

1. That the content of the corresponding para does not
require any reply.

2. That the contents of the corresponding para are denied to

the extent they are inconsistent with the contents of the
Complaint and the present Rejoinder. It is denied that in
the year 2016, the Respondent left the service and went to
his native village due to health problems. It is submitted
that the Respondent was in fact, residing with the
Complainant till December, 2018.

3. That the contents of the corresponding para are

vehemently denied for want of proof. As stated in the
Complaint, the Respondent is in the habit of making false
allegations regarding the character of the Complainant
since years, that too without an iota of proof. It is because
of this suspicious nature of the Respondent, wherein he
associates the name of the Complainant with every person
who offers her support, that the Complainant has been
forced to cut off ties with most relatives and
acquaintances over the years, leaving her without
emotional support.

It is further pertinent to point out that the Respondent in

the previous paras has stated that he had left for his native
village in 2016 and that their son had passed away due to
 illness but for the sake of supplementing his exaggerated
story, he has made an accusation of an alleged threat that
the Respondent would be killed like his son, implying
now that he was murdered.

The version of the Respondent is nothing but

unsubstantiated lies being made with the sole intent of
misleading this Hon’ble Court into believing that the
Complainant was living in Adultery, merely to evade his
legal liability of maintaining the Complainant.

4. That the contents of the corresponding para are

vehemently denied for want of proof. The Respondent has
again made contradictory statements herein. It is
submitted that earlier he had stated that he had moved to
native town due to health issues but herein he states that it
was due to the alleged threats.

5. That the contents of the corresponding para are denied. It

was the Respondent who had deserted the Complainant
and their 5 daughters after assaulting the Complainant in
December, 2019 and broke all ties.

6. That the content of the corresponding para does not

require any reply.
7. That the contents of the corresponding para are denied. It
is submitted that the proposal of the Respondent is merely
a rouse to evade his legal liability of maintaining the
Complainant since he is fully aware that the Complainant
is fearful for her life if she is compelled to live with the
Respondent, having been assaulted brutally on multiple
occasions. The Complainant cannot be expected to live
with the Respondent despite his abusive behavior, and the
same cannot be considered desertion or grounds for not
maintain her.

8. That the contents of the corresponding para are denied. It

is submitted that the Respondent is again making
contradictory statements. On one hand, he states that he is
fulfilling all his obligations towards the children and on
the other hand, he is stating that he is under no obligation
to maintain them.

It is further submitted that the present Complaint has not

been filed seeking maintenance for the daughters but only
the Complainant and therefore, the contents of the
corresponding para are irrelevant.

9. That the contents of the corresponding para are

vehemently denied. It is submitted that the Respondent is
also legally liable for maintaining the Complainant. Since
 he is admittedly living in his native village, at his
ancestral home, He does not have to bear any expense
towards rent, unlike the Complainant.

It is also submitted that the Respondent did not bear the

expenses of the daughters’ marriages. In fact, the
expenses were borne by the Complainant after selling her
jewellery, taking personal loans and the salaries/ savings
of the working daughters.

REPLY TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:

1. – 5. That the contents of the corresponding paras are

vehemently denied for want of proof.

REPLY TO REPLY ON MERITS:

1. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits does not require any reply.

2. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated. It is submitted
that the Respondent deserted the Complainant and fled
post signing a written settlement with the Complainant
before PS Kalkaji following an assault on her by him.
3. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply
to Merits does not require any reply.

4. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

5. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

6. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits does not require any reply.

7. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.
8. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply
to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

9. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated. It is submitted
that the Complainant has made several specific averments
with necessary particulars in the Complaint.

10.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

11.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.
12.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply
to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated. It is submitted
that the marital status of Ms. Bhakuni is irrelevant herein.

13.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

14.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated. The Respondent
is again making false unsubstantiated allegations to
misdirect this Hon’ble Court.

15.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.
16.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply
to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

17.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

18.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated. It is reiterated
that the false allegations about the character of the
Complainant are being made by the Respondent to evade
his legal obligation of maintaining her.

19.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits does not require any reply.
20.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply
to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

21.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits does not require any reply.

22.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

23.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

24.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.
 25.That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply
to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated. It is pertinent to
point out that the Respondent has stated his income to be
Rs. 18,000/- per month in one place and Rs. 19,000/- per
month, in another. It is prayed that he be directed to
clarify the same.

26. That the contents of the corresponding para of the Reply

to Merits, so far as it does not admit of the contents of
corresponding para of the Complaint, are wrong and
denied and the contents of corresponding para of the
Complaint are re-asserted and reiterated.

Complainant
Through
Pramanshi
LAC for Complainant
D-89, LGF,
Place: New Delhi East of Kailash,
Dated: New Delhi-65
+91 9910539533; pramanshi@outlook.com
BEFORE THE HON’BLE COURT OF MS. NIDHI SINGH,
LD. MM, SAKET DISTRICT COURT, NEW DELHI
CC NO. 5463 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF:
MADHVI DEVI …COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
KUNDAN SINGH BHAKUNI …RESPONDENTS
PS KALKAJI
LEGAL AID CASE AIDED BY DLSA
AFFIDAVIT

I, Madhvi Devi, w/o Sh. Kundan Singh Bhakuni, aged about __ years,
r/o Flat no. 108 Madngiri Gaon, near Gill Gym, Delhi- 110062
do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:
1. That I am the Complainant in the present Complaint and as
such I am competent to swear this Affidavit.
2. That the accompanying Rejoinder has been drafted under my
instructions and the contents of the same are correct.
3. That the contents hereinabove are true and correct.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

I, the Deponent above named, do hereby verify that the contents of

the above Affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
No part thereof is wrong and nothing has been concealed therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this ____ day of ____ 2022.

DEPONENT