Application for Dismissal with costs under Section Cr.P.C. 468 And Application for cost under Section C.P.C.35B

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE VIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
CYBERABAD AT RAJENDER NAGAR.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASE No. xx/2016.

BETWEEN

.. Petitioner

VERSUS –

Mr.yyyy s/o. .. Respondents

Application for dismissal with costs under section Cr.P.C. 468

And Application for cost under section C.P.C.35B

MOST RESPECTFULLY-

  1. The Petitioner has filed this case DVC No. xxxx against respondent 1 2, The matter is pending before this Hon’ble Court and is listed for today.

  2. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner has filed this case after respondent has filed HINDU MARRIAGE PETITION NO. Axxx of 2016 for divorce U/s. Section 13(1) (ia)(ib) (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the petitioner and sought a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty by the wife against the husband dated 7-5-2016. The respondent no 1 was living and working in Pune and respondent no 2 was living in Nagpur, whereas petitioner was living and working in Hyderabad. The petitioner on her own will has deserted the respondent in the year of 2013 after the birth of healthy male child. Since there was no domestic relation between petitioner and respondent in the said period and the petition has been filed after a lapse of 3 years in the year 2016, the present petition is not maintainable as per the provisions of section 468 of Cr.P.C. as the mentioned section bars any complaint filed beyond this limit. As the mentioned section puts limit of 1 year to file present petition under Domestic Violence act 2005, whereas the petition is beyond its limit, i.e., after more than 1 year by abusing the process of law and to harass and put financial and mental pressure on the respondents by tangling them into false litigation.

  1. The petitioner has approached this Hon’ble court with unclean hands and filed the mentioned false Domestic violence case in a fit of rage to add on harassment towards the respondents. The present petition is filed to squeeze out money and harass the already distressed and exhausted respondents and making them to contest the false litigation filed by petitioner to fulfill` her ulterior motives. The petitioner is unnecessarily protracting the litigation to add to her harassment towards respondents by seeking unexplained adjournments. To add to her adjournments, the petitioner keeps on changing advocates frequently. Initially the petitioner used to remain absent. The petitioner is delaying/not submitting her evidences from past couple of months. In spite of requests of respondent, the petitioner had been adamant in not sharing child’s bank account details as respondent intended to comply with the order dated 18-01-2018 issued by this Hon’ble court by transferring the amount to child. Finally the respondent was compelled to submit a memo in the court asking for child’s bank account details in which money need to be transferred and accordingly petitioner was directed to open a bank account for child so that the maintenance amount could be deposited. However the petitioner submitted a memo to this Hon’ble court regarding the compliance of the order dated 18-01-2018. Petitioner has approached the Hon’ble court with false allegations and mala fide intention hiding the facts and diverting court from taking best/correct decision in the interest of justice. To exemplify, she had approached court hiding her earning and savings information.

  1. The petitioner is well qualified and earning lady with an income of Rs. 50000/- per month. She is working with M/s. Optum Global Solutions (India) Private limited with Hyderabad. This is evident from her Form 26AS Section 192 i.e. Annual Tax Statement u/s 203AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with her EPF getting deducted at Gurgaon EPFO office. She is getting an interest of Rs. 1,35,000/- every year towards her savings in Andhra banks which by considering current interest rate amounts to Rs. 20,00,000/-. This is evident from her Form 26AS Section 194A i.e. Annual Tax Statement u/s 203AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Also petitioner being financially well equipped approached the Hon’ble Supreme court vide transfer petition (Civil) No. xxx of 2016 to transfer divorce case HINDU MARRIAGE PETITION NO. A xxx of 2016 for divorce to Hyderabad city and the case is now in the jurisdiction of THE COURT OF HON’BLE DISTRICT JUDGE-CUM-FAMILY COURT RANGA REDDY DISTRICT: AT: L.B. NAGAR bearing case no. FCOP NO. xxx OF 2017.The petitioner being well qualified and earning lady with a very stable financial background that is evident from the documents submitted to the Hon’ble court, which by considering the facts as per order dated 18-01-2018 issued by this Hon’ble court she is not awarded with interim maintenance and as per order equal duties is casted on both the earning parent towards child.

  1. Respondents, respondent no 2 being a senior citizen are travelling from the state of Maharashtra to attend the court dates regularly and are intended to suffer financially, physically and mentally due to petitioner’s harassment and protraction of litigation. The respondents have to bear unnecessary travelling, lodging boarding, local conveyance etc costs per hearing. Hence respondents request for compensation under Legal Provisions of Section 35 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908.

Prayer:

In the view of above it is humbly prayed to this Hon’ble Court that the present petition which has been lodged with an inordinate delay may be dismissed being barred by Limitation as per the provisions of law, with heavy costs and taking necessary action against petitioner for misusing the law by filing false case and concealing the true facts from court to fulfill her ulterior motives and for mentally and financially harassing the innocent respondents. It is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent for compensation, and dismiss the case in the interest of justice as the Hon’ble court may deem fit.

Date:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE VIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
CYBERABAD AT RAJENDER NAGAR.

I. A. No. of 2018

IN

D.V.C. No. 29/2016

BETWEEN

Mrs. xxx .. Petitioner

AND

  1. Mr.India,

  2. Mr.zzzz Respondents

Application for dismissal with costs under section Cr.P.C. 468 And Application for cost under section C.P.C.35B

Filed on: ___.09.2018

Filed by:

COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENTS

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *