0

K-21

IN THE FAMILY COURT AT BOMBAY

Divorce Petition under hindu marriage act,1955 on the Grounds of Cruelty and Adultry

Ms. Ananya Thakur )

Indian Inhabitant, aged 29years, )
Occupation: Housekeeper, residing at )
Room no Nos. 32/C, Daulat Nagar, )
Borivali East, Mumbai-400066 )
) …. Petitioner

Versus

Aarav Thakur
Indian Inhabitant, aged 30years, )
Occupation: Shopowner, residing at )
Harale Complex. 73/D, Gorai 2, )
Borivali West, Mumbai-400066 )
) …. Respondent.

TO,
THE HON’BLE JUDICATOR
AND THE HON’BLE JUDGES
OF HIGH COURT OF
BOMABY.
In the matter of dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956:

Most respectfully shweth as under;

 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ..............................................................................................................

Index of Authorities

Table of Cases ......................................................................................................

Books ....................................................................................................................

Lexicon .................................................................................................................

Websites................................................................................................................

Statues ..................................................................................................................

The Statement of Jurisdiction...........................................................................................

The Statement of Facts.....................................................................................................

The Statement of Charges .................................................................................................

The Summary of Arguments............................................................................................

The Argument advanced………………………………………………………………..

The Prayer ........................................................................................................................

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 2

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

List Of Cases

1. Pillu @ Prahlad vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. Criminal Appeal No-766/2001.

2. Babubai @ Bhaliyo Somabhai Vs State of Gujarat. Criminal Appeal No- 489/2013

3. Jan Mohammad Vs State of Allahabad. Criminal Appeal No- 48 1AIR 19963.

4. Nagendran vs State of Madras. Criminal Appeal No- 301/2018.

5. Om Prakash Vs State of Allahabad. Criminal Appeal No- 452, AIR1956 All 241.

6. Surajbhan Singh Vs State of M.P. Criminal Appeal No- 6213/2021.

7. Vellikannu vs. R. Singaperumate & Anr. Criminal appeal- 4838/1999

8. Hari Om and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Criminal Appeal No- 294 SC.

9. Suresh Prasad Vs. State of Bihar. Criminal No- 4154/2001.

10. Jagmohan Singh vs The State of U.P. Criminal Appeal- AIR 947/1973

11. Smt. Rajeshwari Shetty vs. The State of Karnataka. 11665/2018.

12. Deepak Sarna vs State of Delhi. Criminal Appeal No- 174/2004

13. Manokaran Vs. State of Tamil Nadu. Criminal Appeal No-

14. Surain Singh Vs State of Punjab. Criminal Appeal No- 2284/2009

15. Satish Vs. States U.P. Criminal Appeal No- 256/2005 257/2005

16. Govind Singh Vs State of Chattisgarh. Criminal Appeal No-770/2019

17. Kalabhai vs State of M.P. Criminal Appeal No- SCC502/2019

18. Maniben vs State Of Gujrat. Criminal Appeal No-SCC796/2009

19. Santosh Vs State of Rajasthan. Criminal Appeal No- SCC663/

20. Minto vs Sushil Mohansingh Malik & Anr. Criminal Appeal No- BOM68/AIR1982

21. Bhagwan Tukaram Dange Vs. State of Maharastra. Criminal Appeal No-SCC270/2014

22. Nagabhushan vs State of Karnataka. Criminal Appeal No- SCC22/2021.

23. State of Karnataka v. Chand Basha (2015) 3 ACR 3439

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 3

24. G. Parshwanath v. State of Karnataka (2010) 8 SCC 593.

25. Sattatiya v. State of Maharashtra (2008) 3 SCC 210.

26. Bharat v. State of M.P. (2003) 3 SCC 106.

Books

1. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

2. Family Courts Act

3. CPC

4. Matrimonial Laws

Lexicons

1. Aiyar, P. Ramanathan, The Law Lexicon, (2nded 2006.)

Websites

1. http://www.manupatrafast.com

2. http://www.scconline.com

3. http://www.judis.nic.in

4. https://indiankanoon.org

5. https://www.the-laws.com

6. https://www.manupatrafast.com

Statutes

1. TheEvidenceAct,1872

2. TheIndianPenalCode,1860

3. The Code of Criminal Procedure,1973

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 4

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The petitioner (Ananaya) and the respondent (Arav) have agreed to

submit the case concering the dissoultion of marriage in the family court of
bombay persuant to section 13 of the family court act, 1984. The jurisdiction
of the court has not contested. There is no dispute as to the jurisdiction of the
court

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 5

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The Present Appeal relates to a petition filed under section 13 of Hindu marriage act, 1955 by
Ananaya Thakur, the petitioner wife praying that the between the parties be dissolved by the decree
of the court.

2. The parties dispute entered into a marital agreement on 01-04-2015 as per contaitions laid down
by the petitioner wife resided in her matrimonial home for 5 days . post the solmnization of
marriage but marriage between the parties was not consumnated.

3. The husband mistreated her and they never shared bed toghether she returned to her parents
home after 5 days . following the cultural practice in indian society, her parents sent her back to her
matrimonial place explaining that with passing time by,situations willget better and the husband
approch towards the tie would improve.

4. Inspite of spending five years with the respondent husband would return home late at nights.in a
drunken state and would physically , mentally and emotionally abused to her . He would beat her in
a drunkeness. She extended efforts tp persuade and convince him.

5. However, all her attempts to mend ways were proved to be vain . she also discovered that the
respondent husband was a man of weak character. He was involved in extra maretial relationships
with multiple women,was an alchoholic and used to consume into toxicants .she Moved out of her
matrimonial residence in july 2020 and since then has been staying with her parents place.

6. The Respondent husband replace to the Contention in a contradictory manner and and stated that
the petitioner wife was given a bonafide treatment during their stay together. He further stated that
Petitioner wife was not interested in residing with the parents of the respondent and kept conveing
him to move out of the house perhaps he was an unemployed men and could not at fall to live
separate and so the demand was totally absurd and unacceptable to him.

7. Thereafter the petitioner wife moved out from the matrimonial home without citing any
reasonable and valid justification along with her stridhan. He constantly made efforts to her back to
their matrimonial home but she refuse to return.
8. Thereafter He filed a petition under sec.9 of hindu marriage act 1955 , praying for restitution of
conjugal right. The court was pleaded to grant his prayer the said petition was not contested by the
wife nor she did she returned to her matrimonial home with all other marital ornaments. Petition
were denied and prayed that the petition be dismissed with cost.
WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 6

STATEMENT OF CHARGES

AT THE HON'BLE COURT OF METROPOLIANAT

BORIVALI

CASE NUMBER: 76/2017

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...PROSECUTION

V/S
MR. ARNAV THAKUR ...ACCUSED/DEFENCE

THE CHARGE

That the accused Aarnav Thakur on 09.12..2017, at 10.20 am within the jurisdiction of
Borivali Police Station at Mumbai Arnav Thakur Attacked on Miss Ananya
Takur in an dunken state with the belt and stick and inflicted serious injurious
leading to multipule fracturors in hand and leg of the petitioner committed an
offence punishable under section 498A, 323,324,504,506 of the Indian Penal Code and
within the cognizance of this Court.

Dated this: 9 December 2017

Sd/-

Metropolian Magistrate
Court at Borivali

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 7

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 8

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE 1

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the

1. Whether the ground
ground stated by the petitioner are sufficient enough to
stated in the petition by the
entitile her to obtain a decree of divorce by the court.
petitioner are sufficient

ISSUE 2

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 9

2.Whether the petition is maintainable..?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the petition raised by the petititioner is
maintainable on the grounds of cruelty and adultry .

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 1
0

ISSUE 3

3.whether the petitioner

has any cause of action or It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that
locus standi to file and raised petition has strong cause of action and locus standi
maintain the present to file and maintain the present petition.
petition.

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 21
1

THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED

ISSUE I

1. Whether the ground stated in the petition by the petitioner are sufficient enough to entitile
her to obtain a decree of divorce.
Petition under section 13 of hindu marriage act, 1955

The above mentioned petitioner Respectifully submits as under that:

1. The petitioner and respondent were married on 1 st April 2015 According to

Hindu vedic rites act. The petitioner and respondent were hindus before marriage
and are hindus after marriage and are domiciled in india. Before the marriage the
petitioner was a spinster aged about 24 years and the respondent was a bachelor
aged about 25 years.

2. After marriage the petitioner was recited at her matrimonial place for five days,
post of the solmnization of marriage but the same was not consumated . The
Respondent mistreated her and they never shared bed together

3. The petitioner states that from the Month of May 2016, the respondent began to
ill- treat the petitioner and from the month of june 2016, began to physically
assualt the petitioner without any cause whoseover, for some time the petitioner
made no complaint and underwent such ill- treatment, hoping that the respondent
would see better sense, however on or about month of july 2017 the respondent
attacked the petitioner by the Belt and stick in drunken state and inflicated serious
injurious leading to multipule fractures in hand on leg of the petitioner.

4. The petitioner there upon lodged a complaint at the polic station being No
133/2017 The petitioner craves leave to refer to and rely upon a copy of the said
complaint when produced.

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 21
2

5. The Respondent is a characterless man. On december 2017 when a petitioner is

returned from his shop earliar for another his work. She saw to repondent in a
copromising position with a stranger, who ran away after the petitioner arrival;
since this incident , the petitioner has been living with her parents.

6. The petitioner says that even thereafter the respondent continued to treat the
petitioner in a cruel and violent manner . The petitioner says that such cruelty has
cause an apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it will be harmful and
injurious for the petitioner to continue to live with the respondent

7.There is no collusion or connivance between the petitioner and the respondent in

filing this Petition.

8.No other proceedings with respect to the marriage betweenthe petitioner and the
respondent have been filed in this honrable court or in any other court of india.

9. The petitioner being a lady exempt from payment of court fees.

10.The petitioner will rely on Documents a list wherof is annexed hereto.

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 21
3

ISSUE II

2. WHETHER THE PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE..?

Jurisduction of Family Court of under family courts act, 1984.

It is humbly submitted before this hon’ble court that whenever suit or

proceedings between the parties to a marriage for a decree of nulity of marriage or
restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage arises the
juridiction conferred under sec 7 of the family courts act 1984 can be invoked.

Section 7 of the family courts as follows;

(1) Subject to the other subject of this provisions of this act, a family court shall
(a) Have and all the jurisdiction exercisable by any district court or any subordinate city
civil court under any law for the time being in respects of suits and proceedings of the
nature referred to in the
Explainataion

(b) Be deemed, for the exercising such jurusdiction under such law, to be a district court
or as the case may be, such subordinate court for the area to which the jurisdiction of the
family court extends.

2. Petitoner has strong cause of action and locus standi to maintain this present
petition.

Its is humbly submitted before the hon,ble court that the ground grounds stated by the
petitioner are sufficient enough and clear to entitle her to obtain a divorce decree by the
court.

The petitioner (Ananaya) is seeking crave for divorce petition on the grounds of Cruelty
and adultry.

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 21
4

ISSUE III

3. WHETHER THE PETITIONER HAS ANY CAUSE OF ACTION OR LOCUS

STANDI TO FILE AND MAINTAIN THE PRESENT PETITION…?

It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the petitoner has strong cause of
action and locus standi to file and maintain this present petition.

3.1 locus standi to file and maintain the present petition by the petitioner
( Anannya)

Under the hindu marriage act 1955, section 13(1) lays down nine fault ground of
divorce.
Some of which include Adultry, desertion, cruelty, insanity, leprosy, veneral disease and
other such as a convirson, or renunucitaion of world.

Section 13 of hindu marriage act 1955 states that;

(1) Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this act, may
on a petition presented by either the husband or wife, be dissilve a decree on the ground
that the other party

(a) Has after the solmnization of the marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty’
Has deserted the petitioner for a continuos period of not less than two years immegiatly
Preciding the presentaion of the petition.

3.1.1 Cruelty.

The petitioner states that from the Month of May 2016, the respondent began to ill-
treat the petitioner and from the month of june 2016, began to physically assualt the
petitioner without any cause whoseover, for some time the petitioner made no
complaint and underwent such ill- treatment, hoping that the respondent would see
better sense, however on or about month of july 2017 the respondent attacked the
petitioner by the Belt and stick in drunken state and inflicated serious injurious leading
to multipule fractures in hand on leg of the petitioner.

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 21
5
3.2.2Adultey.

The Respondent is a characterless man. On december 2017 when a petitioner is

returned from her job earliar for another his work. She saw to repondent in a
compromising position with a stranger, who ran away after the petitioner arrival; since
this incident , the petitioner has been living with her parents.

In this case petitioner has strong evidences to prove that the respondent had physically
attacked and abused to her as well he had voulinterily and consensual intercourse with
other women.

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT
 21
6

PRAYER

In the light of the above facts,this hon,ble court may be pleaded to pass:

1. A decree of divorce passed in favor of the petitioner;

2. Any other orders which this Hon’ble court may be pleased to pass in the interest of
justice and equity.

AND/OR

Pass any other order, as it deems fit, in light of justice, equity and good conscience.

All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted

District: Mumbai S/d

Date: PUBLICPROSECUTOR

WRITTENSUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHERESPONDENT