In the court of Ld.

Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court at

Howrah

Ref: Misc. Case No. 623/2022

MONIKA JHA……………………Aggrieved Person/Petitioner/Wife.

VERSUS

1. AJAY KUMAR JHA

2. NISHA JHA
3. MOUSAM JHA...….……………Respondents/Opposite Parties.

The Humble Written Objection

filed by the Respondents/
Opposite Parties.

Most respectfully the Respondents/Opposite Parties beg to state as

follows: -

1. That the instant case is not maintainable neither in fact nor in law.

2. That at the outset it is stated that all the allegations mentioned in the case is
speculative, motivated, malafied, misconceived and harassing in nature.

3. That the case barred by waiver, estoppels and acquienrescence.

4. That this application has been filed suppressing the material facts.

5. That all the statements made in the petition are vehemently denied by the
Respondents/Opposite Parties and the Aggrieved Person/Petitioner is put to
the strict proof thereof, save and except what is admitted herein below by the
Respondents/Opposite Parties.

6. That the Respondents/Opposite Parties denies and disputes the allegations

and/or statements made in the said application save and except what is the
matter of record.

7. That the Respondent no. 1 is the husband of the Aggrieved

Person/Petitioner, Respondent no. 2 is sister in law (Nanad) of the Aggrieved
Person/Petitioner and Respondent no. 3 is sister in law (Boudi) of the
Aggrieved Person/Petitioner.

[1]
8. That with regard to the statement made in Paragraph 1 of the Said Petition,
the Respondents/Opposite Parties makes no comments on the same and
accepted the same regarding his marriage and as the marriage took place at
the native place of the Aggrieved Person/Petitioner and just after the
marriage, both the parties went to the native place of
Respondent/Husband’s ancestral house situated at Village – Kasba, P.O. –
Kasba,VTC, Shambhuganj, District – Banka, Bihar. Pin code no. 813211.
The Respondent’s family member does not demand anything at the time of
marriage so, the question of bringing less dowry was totally false, fabricated
and concocted. At the beginning things were peaceful but the problem arose
right after few days from the date of the said marriage as the Aggrieved
Person/Petitioner/Wife had developed sense dissatisfaction and picked up
fights for no rhyme or reason which started impacting the
Respondent/Husband’s matrimonial life, post their marriage. It is pertinent
to mention that, in the point no. 1 of the Petition u/s. 12 of P.W.D.V. Act,
filed by the Aggrieved Person/Petitioner/Wife wrote that their marriage was a
negotiable marriage but just after that, it is written that, after solemnized of
their marriage, Aggrieved Person/Petitioner/Wife’s family members accepted
their marriage, which brings full of contradiction

9. That the statements made in the Paragraph no. 2 & 3 of the Petition are
totally false and denied by the Respondents/Opposite Parties as neither the
Respondents/Opposite Parties and their family members expressed any
dissatisfaction towards the Aggrieved Person/Petitioner/Wife nor abused the
Aggrieved Person/Petitioner/Wife by assaulting physically or mentally nor
taunt her in a single time by saying the she came from beggar or she had no
idea to how to cook and it is also false to say that she did not get proper food
in her daily life. The Respondents/Opposite Parties tried his level best to
maintain her wife in a proper way and till her leaving the matrimonial house,
the Opposite Party no. 1 tried his level best to fulfill her every demand within
his capacity. It is false to say that, the Respondents demanded dowry of Rs.
11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh only), so, the question of compelled to give
cash and other golden articles are false, fabricated and concocted one.

10. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 4 of the Petition is totally
false and denied by the Respondents/Opposite Parties. It is false to say that
neither the Respondent no. 1/Husband is a businessman nor he earned Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) per month. Fact is the Respondent
no. 1/Husband is a daily labour and worked under a contractor. He earns
Rs. 500/- per day but it is no work no pay basis job.

11. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 5 of the Petition is totally
false and denied by the Respondents/Opposite Parties. It is false to say that
after her marriage, the Petitioner has found that her husband and other in-
laws i.e. the Respondents are very greedy and stingy persons. The
Respondents have not appointed any maid servant for domestic work, in
fact the Respondent No. 3 never helps the Petitioner for doing domestic
work. It is also false to say that the Respondents used to force the Petitioner
to work from early morning to late night like servant and on minor fault the
Respondents used to assault the Petitioner and they did not provide proper
food, clothes and medicine to the Petitioner and on raising protest the

[2]
 Respondent No. 1 supported by the other Respondents used to asked the
Petitioner to bring cash of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Ruees Five Lakh only) from her
parents. It is also false to say that the Petitioner belongs to lower middle
class family. The Petitioner is from a well to do family and moreover the
Petitioner completed her B.B.A. Degre from a reputed institution, though
the Respondent no. 1 does not know whether the Petitioner is doing any job
or not but the Respondent no. 1 does not surprise if her wife might be
engaged with a job. It is also false to say to that the Petitioner realized that
it is not Possible for her parents to fulfill unreasonable and illogical demand
of the Respondents and when the Petitioner has protested against their
demand then the Petitioner was mercilessly and inhumanly torture by them.

12. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 6 of the Petition is totally
false and denied by the Respondents/Opposite Parties. It is false to say that
after few days of their marriage, the Petitioner noticed that the Respondent
No.1 had a bad habit to consumed alcohol at night and abusing the
Petitioner by filthy languages which is very unfortunate to the Petitioner
being wife and it is too tough to digest. It is also false to say that during the
staying at her matrimonial house, the Petitioner on several occasion made
protest against the said activities of the Respondent No.1 and as a result of
which the Respondent No.1 with help of other Respondents never hesitated
to do physical and mental torture, assaulted the Petitioner in repeated
occasion. Fact is the Petitioner being wife never tried at her label best to
explain the Respondent No.1 that he is doing wrong, it is false to say that
the Respondent No. 1 never understand the Petitioner's feelings which was
creating mental cruelty upon the Petitioner. The Respondent has tried to
lead a normal matrimonial life with his wife but it is the Petitioner, who
from the first day of their matrimonial life showed dissatisfaction towards
the Respondents never behave properly with the Respondents.

13. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 7 of the Petition is partly
true and partly false. It is a fact that the Petitioner became pregnant and
she gave birth a male child namely Privanshu Jha on 14.08.2014 but it is
false to say the Petitioner's father bore all expenses of delivery and Further
upbringing till date of male child of the Petitioner. Fact is from the first day
of pregnancy, the Respondent look after her wife and discharged his duty as
a husband perfectly. The Respondent took her wife before the Gynecologist
time to time. The rest Respondents also did their duty toward the Petitioner
regularly during her pregnancy period. The Respondent, who look after his
wife and minor son from his meagre income till her leaving matrimonial
house on 8th December’ 2022. On that day, the Respondent after returning
from his work found that the Petitioner left her matrimonial taking her
minor son. It is also false to say that Petitioner's father has also been bore
all expenses of rice ceremony of the Petitioner's son and also gave some gold
ornament like gold necklace. gold baby bala, gold ring etc. to the Petitioner's
son. Its is also false to say that presently all gold ornaments are under the
Respondents custody.

14. That the statements made in the Paragraph no. 8 & 9 of the Petition are
totally false and denied in toto. It is false to say that the Respondents are
unhappy and on 16.09.2014 they insulted the Petitioner in different ways
and again started physical and mental torture upon the Petitioner for

[3]
 further demand of Dowry amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only).
It is also false to say that being mother it is impossible for the Petitioner to
digest which created mental agony upon the Petitioner. It is not a fact that
the Respondent No. 1 is a Person of immoral Character and having extra
Marital affair with the Respondent No. 3, except seizing money from the
Petitioner's parents his futile brain has no gesture. It is false to say that the
Respondent No.1 has no interest, love, affection with the Petitioner and her
minor son which is very unfortunate for the Petitioner. The Petitioner never
had any colourful days throughout her matrimonial life. The Respondent no.
1 does not make any comments regarding her wife’s view relating the
character of the Respondent no. 1 at the time of marriage his wife had no
knowledge about the original character of the Respondents. It is false to say
that the Petitioner always hides the Respondents behavior upon her from
her parents. The Respondent no. 1 does not make any comments regarding
her wife’s view relating the comments made by her wife the she due to the
prestige of the Petitioner and her parents, had tolerated all torture of the
Respondents and never lodges any complaint against the Respondents. The
Respondents never create any torture upon Petitioner so the question of
tolerate torture upon Petitioner is totally false. It is also false to say that the
Petitioner being faithful and devoted wife tried to change the character and
behavior of the Respondent No.1 toward herself but the Respondent No.1 is
acquainted with his-bad habits. As a result of which the Petitioner was
brutally and in human torture by the Respondents. The family members of
the Respondent No. 1 have provoked him to betting the Petitioner on minor
mistake.

15. That the statements made in the Paragraph no. 10 & 11 of the Petition is
totally false and denied by the Respondents/Opposite Parties. It is false to
say that on 06.07.2022 at about 7:30 P.M the Respondent No. 1 told the
Petitioner that he is not satisfied with the Petitioner and he want divorce
from her and also told the Petitioner to left her matrimonial residence
immediately but the Petitioner have made protest against the Respondent
No. 1’s decision and as a result of which tremendous torture and / or cruelty
started upon the Petitioner. It is also false to say that he tried to kill the
Petitioner by pressing her throat and it is also false to say that when she
tried to shout then pressing towel on her mouth and Further do hereby
inform that after beating the Petitioner as above noted on 06.07.2022 at
about 7.30 P.M, Respondent No.1 ran away from house and so finding no
other alternative the Petitioner went to her parental house, but respondents
came to the Petitioner’s parental home on 19/08/2022 and threatens the
Petitioner that the Respondents would beat the Petitioner more if the
Petitioner’s father did not provide excess amount of Dowry of Rs. 5,00,000/-
(Rupees Five lakh only) and also of, if the Petitioner informed the above
noted incident to police station, it is also false to say that the Petitioner went
to her matrimonial home on 21/08/2022 for collection of her Personal
belongings and phone called the Respondent No.1 for Keys of the Door again
the Respondent No.1 threatened on the petitioner of dire consequences if
again the petitioner came here again, so finding no other alternative the
petitioner went to Golabari Police Station and lodges a written complaint
against the Respondent No. 1, which was recorded as G. D. Entry No. 1517
dated 21/08/2022 and after that the Petitioner went to her parental house
and started to live there. Fact is the Respondent no. 1 did not have any idea
whether the Petitioner made any complaint before Golabari Police Station or
not as on 21/08/2022, the Petitioner was very much present in her
matrimonial house along with their minor son. It is totally false to say that

[4]
 that on 21/08/2022 to till today, the Petitioner along with her son stay at
her parental house and during this period, the Respondent No.1 never
provides any money to the Petitioner and her son. It is totally vague and
concocted story made by the Petitioner, alleging that the Respondent
continuous barbarism, torture both physical and mental cruelty as
organized by the Respondents, the Petitioner's livelihood, status and prestige
is being totally jeopardized.

16. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 12 of the Petition is
totally partly true and partly false and the false part is denied by the
Respondent/Opposite Party no. 1 in toto. The Respondent no. 1 is not
physically fit as the Respondent met with a dangerous accident in the year
2016 and since then the Respondent is under treatment till now. It is true
that now he more or less fit but his treatment is still continuing (some
medical papers are annexed with this written objection). It is false to say
that the Respondent No. 1 never earn Rs.50.000/-to 60,000/only per
month. So, the Petitioner’s claim regarding the Respondent No. 1 has
sufficient source of income is totally false and it is true that no other person
is / are dependent upon the Respondent No.1. The Respondent No. 1 is a
daily labour so spending his money to lead luxurious life style by dis-
obeying and depriving the Petitioner and her minor son is totally false and
concocted. The Respondent do not make any comment regarding the income
of the Petitioner but it is a fact that her wife is an educated person and she
might income a healthy amount. The Respondent does not any idea
regarding whether at present, the Petitioner's father has no sufficient
income to maintain the Petitioner and her minor son expenses. It is false to
say that the Petitioner apprehend that if somehow the Petitioner will enter
into the matrimonial house, then the Respondents will kill her and for that
reason your Petitioner prays for direction for providing rent of Rs. 6.000/-
only per month for residence of alterative suitable accommodation of same
level because the Respondents. The Respondent does not make any
comments regarding the Petitioner prayers for maintenance Rs. 10,000/-
per month for herself and Rs. 10,000/- per month for her minor son as it is
Ld. Court, who decide whether the Petitioner will get maintenance or not
and the Respondent is full faith on Ld. Court’s Decision. The Respondent
No.1 is an able body person can easily pay the same. Under such
compelling circumstances, the Petitioner is compelled to instituted instant
case for final and interim relief as pray for.

17. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 13 of the Petition is totally
false and denied by the Respondents/Opposite Parties. It is false to say that
the Petitioner is victim of Domestic Violence at the hand of the Respondents
and has suffered mental injury and torture as well as physical torture and
assault and emotional distress caused by Domestic Violence committed by
the Respondents and pray for compensation order of Rs. 1,00,000/- only.

18. That the statement made in the Paragraph no. 14 of the Petition seem to
be vague as it directly creates pressure upon Ld. Court. Fact is the
Petitioner filed this case against the Respondents for seeking some relief
from this Ld. Court, the how can she claim a direction to provide monetary
relief and also not provide residence relief when whole purpose of filling
would be in fructuous. The Respondents only obey the direction of this Ld.
Court.

[5]
19. That on 8th December’ 2022, at about 9pm, while the Respondent no.1
returned his house from his work, he found that the main door of his room
was under lock and key. Initially the Respondent thought that his wife may
went to market or any other place. Thereafter, the Respondent unlock his
room. He waited for his wife and minor son till late night but they did not
return back, meanwhile, the Respondent tried to contact his wife through
but he found her mobile was switched off. It is pertinent to mention that one
Surendar Shaw is living just adjacent to the Respondent no. 1’s room and
from few months the Respondent noticed that said Surendar Shaw tried to
influence her wife and on the other hand the Petitioner was also allowing
him. Primarily, the Respondent no. 1 ignored it, thereafter observing Said
Surendar Shaw’s ill motive, restrained her wife but on that day while he
found his wife and his minor son was not coming till late night then the
Respondent went to Surendar Shaw’s room and found he was also missing.
Then everything was clear to the Respondent. He understands said
Surendar Shaw eloped his wife and kidnapped his minor son. The Petitioner
along with Surendar Shaw left matrimonial house taking her minor son
forcefully and without informing the Respondent.

20. Thereafter, the Respondent searched them in various places and in the
end, he found that her wife and her minor son are now living with Surendar
Shaw in another mess. He the Respondent no. 1 visited his matrimonial
home and tried to resolve the matter but the Aggrieved
Person/Petitioner/Wife denied every time and clearly said she do not want
to carry forward her conjugal life with the Aggrieved Person/Petitioner and
also told that she is happily living with Surendar Shaw. She will not come
back to her matrimonial house anymore.

21. Thereafter, the Respondent no. 1, went to Golabari Police Station and
submitted a written complaint against Surendar Shaw and Monika Jha, but
the Police Personnel of Golabari Police Station made a G. D. Entry, being no.
578, dated 07.12.2023.

22. That the Respondent still want to continue his matrimonial relationship
with his wife.

23. That no cause of action arose as alleged.

24. That the prayer of the Aggrieved Person/Petitioner is not sustainable

according to law and be dismissed with exemplary cost

Under the above fact and circumstances,

it is prayed that Your Honour may
graciously be pleased to accept the written
statement filed by the
Respondents/Opposite Parties and
dismissed the suit with exemplary cost
and or pass such necessary order/order
may deem fit and proper

And for this your Aggrieved Person/Petitioner/Husbands as in duty bound

shall ever pray.

[6]
 VAERFICATION

I, Ajay Kumar Jha, husband of Monika Jha, the Respondents/Opposite

Parties in this suit do hereby declare that the statement made above are true

to my knowledge and belief and I sign this verification on day of 2024 at

my Advocate‘s Sherestha at ____________ Court .

Verification duly signed

Advocate

AF F I D A V IT

I, Ajay Kumar Jha, husband of Priyanka Sonkar, aged about 47 years, by faith
Hindu, by occupation – Daily Worker, permanently residing at Village – Kasba,
P.O. – Kasba,VTC, Shambhuganj, District – Banka, Bihar. Pin code no.
813211., do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as follows:

1. That I am the Respondents/Opposite Parties of the instant suit.

2. That I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of this case.

3. That the statements made the forgoing paragraphs are true to my knowledge

and belief and rest are my prayer.

Prepared at my sareshtha,

Deponent

Advocate. Identified by me and

signed in my presence

Advocate

[7]