IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF: Priya Gupta
…Applicant/Aggrieved …Applicant/Aggrieve d Versus
Sh. Sameer & Others
…Respondent I N D E X
S.NO.
1. 2. 3.
PARTICULARS
COURT FEE
PAGES
Memo of parties List of Dates and Events Application Un Under Se Section 12 12, Pro Protec tectio tion
of
Wome omen
Domestic
Violence
From rom Act,
4.
2005. Affidavit
5.
aggrieved/applicant. Application Under Section 23
6.
of the Act. Vakalatnama
of
the
Q
Filed by: APPLICANT/AGGRIEVED PLACE: NEW DELHI
THROUGH
ASSOCIATE ANALYST LAW 251, Lawyer’s Chambers, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi-110001
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF: Priya Gupta
…Applicant/Aggrieved …Applicant/Aggrieve d Versus
Sh. Sameer & Others
…Respondent
MEMO OF PARTIES Priya Gupta W/o Sh. Sameer Gupta D/o Sh. Som Nath, R/o Flat No.3, Pocket-23, Sec Sector tor-24 -24, Rohin ohini, i, Del Delhihi-85
…Ap …Appli plican cant/Ag t/Aggr gri ieve eved
Versus Sh. Sameer & Ors.
…Respondents
Filed by: APPLICANT/AGGRIEVED PLACE: NEW DELHI
THROUGH
ASSOCIATE ANALYST LAW 251, Lawyer’s Chambers, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi-110001
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
Date
20/05/06
Events
Marriage between
of
aggrieved
Priya
Gupta
according
to
Hindu
was
and
solemnized
Sameer
Rites
at
Gupta
Crnival,
G.T.Road, Alipur, Delhi.
5/06/06
Couple went to Goa on Honeymoon where the Sameer Gupta treated very badly on the telephonic direction of his mother because they have already dissatisfied with
the
amount
of
dowry
which
they
received on marriage.
13/06/06
The father (Sh. Som Nath) and Brotherin-law (Jija) of the aggrieved/applicant came on the birthday occasion of Sameer Gupta
to
offer
gift
sweet,
birthday
cake, and a gold ring but instead of welcoming
the
guest
in-laws
of
the
aggrieved not only abused them but also throw out the gift towards the door. As soon they departed the in-laws of the aggrieved started beating the aggrieved. On that day they also threatened to kill her by putting kerosene and setting a fire with matchstick but by the God’s
grace they could not do so because the matchstick put off and could not burn her.
05/08/06
The aggrieved was forced by father-inlaw, husband, uncle, aunt Kusum Gupta of Sameer
Gupta
insisted
to
signed
some
stamp papers and blank papers, on which it was written that in-laws had given all his dowry and they are not making further demand of dowry.
12/08/06 & 18/08/06
On
these
two
dates
the
aggrieved
was
mercilessly beaten up by her husband and thereafter aggrieved too severely fallen ill
to
stand
but
the
Mother-in-law
(Kamlesh Gupta) and on 20.08.06 Sisterin-law
(Amrita
Gupta)
unkindly
askeed
her to prepare food and serve the same and
on
denial
further
of
their
mercilessly
order beaten
they the
aggrieved.
23/08/06
After the above incidence aggrieved was forced to go to her parental house and after 3 days when aggrieved thought that in-laws might have cooled down she went along with her brother and Brother-in-
law (Jija) to matrimonial home but they did allow to enter. However, with the intervention of elders from both sides they allowed to live with them with the condition that she would to communicate anyhow to her parent.
10/09/06
Mother-in-law of the aggrieved told her to take divorce.
13/09/06
On
being
incidence father
fed the
and
complaint
up
with
aggrieved brother
and
this
with the
filed
was
entire
then
a
help
police
medically
examined.
20/09/06
A
complaint
was
filed
against
Sameer
Gupta and others in CAW Cell, Pitampura, New Delhi.
__/01/07
Hence, this present application before this Hon'ble Court.
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF: Priya Gupta
…Applicant/Aggrieved Versus
Sh. Sameer & Others
…Respondent
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT PRIYA GUPTA, U/S 12 OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DEMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1.
That
the
application
under
Section
12
of
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
is
being
filed
alongwith
a
copy
of
Domestic Incident Report by the: (a) Aggrieved
person:
Priya
Gupta
W/o
Sh.
Sameer Gupta (b) Protection Officer: N.A. (c) Any other person of behalf of the aggrieved person: N.A.(Tick whichever is applicable). 2.
It is prayed that the Hon'ble Court may take cognizance
of
the
complaint/Domestic
Incident
Report
and
pass
deemed
necessary
all/any in
the
of
the
orders,
circumstances
of
as the
case, (a) Pass protection orders U/s 18 and/or (b) Pass residence order U/s 19 and/or (c) Direct
the
Respondent
to
pay
monetary
relief U/s 20 and/or (d) Pass orders U/s 21 of the act and/or (e) Direct
the
Respondents
to
grant
compensation or damages U/s 22 and/or (f) Pass such interim orders as the court deem just and proper; (g) Pass
any
order(s)
as
deems
fit
in
the
circumstances of the case. 3.
Orders required: (h) Protection Order Under Section 18 a)
Prohibiting granting
acts an
of
domestic
injunction
violence against
by the
Respondents from repeating any of the acts
mentioned in terms of column 4(a)to(g) of the application:YES b)
Prohibiting Respondent(s) from entering the workplaceNot applicable
c)
Prohibiting from stopping you from going to your place of employmentNot applicable
d)
Prohibiting Respondent(s) from entering the school/college/any
other
place
of
your
childrenNot applicable e)
Prohibiting from stopping you from going to your schoolNot applicable
f)
Prohibiting any form of communication by the respondents with youNot applicable
g)
Prohibiting
alienation
of
assets
by
the
RespondentsThe father-in-law and Mother-in-law of the aggrieved
compelled
the
father
of
the
aggrieved to arrange the marriage of their elder son Deepak with a foreign girl named kasha, as she is being a foreigner she is related
to
no
assurance was aggrieved
one
in
India.
A
false
given to the father of the
that
whatever
amount
would
be
spent in the marriage of the elder son would be
return
back.
On
believing
this
false
assurance, the father of the aggrieved spent a
sum
of
arrangement foreign
Rs.5,11,000/their
girl.
elder
Detail
of
in son the
marriage with
that
expenditure
spent on the marriage of Deepak (The elder son of in-laws of the aggrieved) is annexed as
Annexure-“A”
In
addition
to
all
these
expenses lots of the articles, which have been
gifted to the aggrieved/applicant
at
the time of marriage, have not been given to
her for her use, father it was kept in the room of the Mother-in-law and father-in-law which is now in their possession. All the gold, diamond ornaments, which were given to aggrieved at the time of marriage are still in the possession of the Mother-in-law of the aggrieved and these were never given to use
to
her.
On
05/08/2006
aggrieved
was
compelled by mercilessly beating, continuous torture, and putting her on mental bruise to signed
a
written
paper
that
ornament
on
which
it
was
already
aggrieved
has
taken
all
her
carried
the
same
to
her
and
parental house and in in-laws are not making any
demand
ornament
of
is
dowry.
with
the
However
in
aggrieved
fact
no
except
a
chain to which she puts on around her neck as a daily use. Hence, it is obvious that they
have
malice
intent
items/goods/ornaments 500/-.
A
list
of
to
worth
articles
keep of
all
the
Rs.22,06,
given
by
the
parents of the aggrieved at the time of her marriage
is
Annexed
as
Annexure-“B”.
Therefore,
this
Hon'ble
Court
may
kindly
restrain the respondents from alienation of assets belonging to the aggrieved so that the same may be used by the aggrieved to which she is entitled. h)
Prohibiting
operation
of
joint
bank
lockers /accounts by the respondent(s) and allowing the aggrieved person to operate the sameNot applicable i)
Directing the Respondents to stay away from the dependants/relatives/any other person of the aggrieved person to
prohibit violence
against themYes (i) Order may be passed against the respondents restraining themselves from any of the act mentioned the
above
domestic
under
violence
clauses as
3.Because,
defined
under
section 2(g) read with section 3 of the Act has unrestrictedly becomes the order of the
day. Recently, on 28.11.06 at noon when the complainant aggrieved with her father was at
her
bank
at
Prashant
Respondent
Sameer
unknown
person,
Gupta
Vihar
then
with
the
another
threatened
and
aggrieved/applicant and her father that if on the next day before the CAW Cell, if the applicant would not withdraw her complaint then
they
would
have
to
face
the
dire
consequences and no one can harm them as they have got the bail from the court. More recently, on 06.12.06 in the evening at about 6.25 p.m. a threatening call came from 011-27932586 on the Tata tele service Phone No.011-65161980 at the house of the applicant aggrieved, which was received by her and the respondent Sameer Gupta, who threatened the applicant to kill her and her
family
withdrawal
members of
the
in
said
case
of
complaint
non filed
before CAW Cell and no one save them as
they know very well how to play with the law. Therefore,
this
Hon'ble
Court
may
kindly
restrain the respondents to keep away from the
relatives
of
the
aggrieved
to
avoid
violence against them.
j) (i)
Any other order, please specify: Also, to direct the respondents to pay the minimum amount of Rs.18,000/- per month to the
aggrieved/applicant,
paying same
the
is
applicant
covered
as
any
under
they
are
not
money,
and
the
the
definition
of
“Economic Abuse”, U/s 3(iv), Under the Act. (ii) Residence Order under Section 19 a)
An
order
restraining
respondent(s)
from
Dispossessing or throwing me out from the shared householdNot applicable b)
Entering
that
household
in
portion
which
I
of
the
shared
(applicant)
reside-
The aggrieved has always been given threat by the in-laws about throwing her out from the matrimonial home, On number of times the aggrieved has been put on mercilessly beating, torturing, in order to get rid of her and deprive her from all the benefit, which
ought
matrimonial
to
have
property.
in
the
Hence,
assets it
is
of most
likely that aggrieved would be deprived of her right to live in her matrimonial house without a default on her part. Therefore, this Hon'ble Court may restrain Respondents from dispossessing or throwing her out of the
shared
household
and
be
given
an
express right to live in her matrimonial home
No.A-4,
34-35,
Sector-4,
Rohini,
Delhi. In view of the above the respondents may be directed a allow applicant to enter into the room(s) flat of matrimonial share house.
c)
Alienating/disposing/encumbering the shared householdRespondents alienate
may
be
ordered
not
to
/disposing-off/encumbering
the
shared house –hold because attitude of the respondents
clearly
indicate
their
intention to deprive the aggrieved from the shared household by any or all of the means mentioned as above. d)
Renouncing
his
right
in
the
shared
householdNot applicable e)
Secure
same
level
of
alternate
accommodation or pay rent for the sameNot applicable f)
Any
other
order,
please
specify— Legally
in-snare the respondents so that they may not repeat the violence, demand of dowry, and adopting any sort of torturing tactics on the applicant/aggrieved in future. And
also respondents may be directed to stop violence
and
totally
deprived
themselves
from acting any other act/omission, which lead to the hurdels and disturbances to the peaceful life of the applicant/aggrieved. Or any such other or further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the fact and circumstances
of
the
case
and
in
the
interest of justice. (iii) a)
Monetary relief’s under Section 20: Loss of enarnings, amount claimed: Not Applicable
b)
Medical expenses, Amount claimed: Not Applicable
c)
Loss
due
to
destruction/damage
or
removal of property from the control of the aggrieved person: Not Applicable d)
Total amount claimed:
(a)
Dowry
Demanded
and
paid
to
the
respondents Rs.27,17,500/(b)
Any other loss or physical or mental injury as specified in Clause 10(b) Amount claimed Rs.500,000/-.
(c)
Legal expenses claimed Rs.10,000/Grand Total Rs.32,27,500/-
Any other order, please specify: Any
other
amount
in
the
form
of
compensation, which the court may deem, fit in the interest of justice. (iv) a)
Monetary relief’s under Section 20 Directing
the
Respondents
to
pay
the
following expenses as monetary relief:b)
Food,
clothes,
medications
and
other
basic necessities, amount10,000/- Per Month c)
School child
fees
and
related
expenses
Not Applicable
of
d)
Household expenses
Rs.5000/- p.m.
e)
Any other expenses
Rs.3000/- p.m.
Total amount claimed: Rs.18,000/- p.m. N.B.:
The
husband
of
the
aggrieved
is
running his own mobile phone business from which he earns near about 30,000/- month and in addition to this he ahs share in the rent received from the tenants from the property from his father which is about 6,000/- per month, as such he has total monthly income is Rs.36,000/- per month. Any other order, please specify: This Hon'ble Court may pass such other or further order(s) as it may deem fit in the fact and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice. (v)
Custody Order U/s 21:Not Applicable
Aggrieved Person-
Not Applicable
Any other person on her behalf, details of such person-
Not Applicable
(vi)
Compensation Order U/s 22:
Considering domestic violence which has not only effect on the body but also has drastic effect on the mind which results in loss of expectancy of life and that has rendered the aggrieved in very
measurable
and pathetic
condition. In these facts and circumstances this
Hon'ble
Respondents
to
Court the
may
direct
aggrieved
a
sum
the of
Rs.5,00,000/-. (vii)
Any other order, please specify-
The Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the fact and circumstances of the
case and
in the
interest of justice. 4. Details of previous litigation, if anya. Under the Indian Panel Code: A
Complaint
lodged
on
20.09.06
Under
498-A/406/307/384/506/120-B/34 IPC before b.
Sections
(viii)
k) YES 4.