IN THE LEARNED COURT

BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT AT THANE

DIVORCE PETITION NO. ________ OF 2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

SHRI PRATIK PANCHAL ..................PETITONER

Shri Nath Dham108SV Road,

RNE Park, Near Kashi Vishwanath Mandir

Mahinder East, Thane,

401105

VS.

SMT. NEHA PRAMOD SOMANI ………...RESPONDENT

C.N. 2/8, R.S Road, NRC Colony

Near Japanese Building,

Ambivali East, Kalyan Thane,

401102

APPLICATION UNDER SEC 13 (1) (i-a) OF THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955
Humble Petition on the behalf of the petitioner,

May please your lordship,

1. The petitioner states that, the petitioner was married with the respondent on

December 14,2015 which was a registered marriage for which the petitioner has

obtained valid registration certificate dated 17th December 2015 which is

attached as Exhibit A is a copy of the marriage registration certificate dated

17/12/2015.

2. The petitioner states that as the marriage was merely registered on December

14, 2015 and all the social ceremony then took place on February 17, 2016

wherein the families, friends and the relatives of both the petitioner and

respondent have been present as the part of the social ceremonies pursuant to

the solemnization of the marriage hereto attached as Exhibit B is the copy of the

marriage photograph along with the marriage wedding card.

3. The petitioner at the very outset states that the facts and the circumstances

leading to the filing of the present petition needs to be put on record for the

adjudication of the present petition. The same has been entitled as under:

A. The petitioner states that the petitioner was acquainted with the respondent

for about a year as and around the month August 2015 wherein both the

petitioner and the respondent were working in the same organization namely

Genesis Infoserve Pvt. ltd.

both the petitioner and the respondent developed a closed companionship

which thereafter manifested into a close friendship.

C. The petitioner states that as a result of the close companionship and the close

friendship that was developed in between the petitioner and the respondent

which also resulted in the frequent visits and meeting between the petitioner

and the respondent which then resulted into a very close bonding between

the parties present before this honorable court.

D. The petitioner states that as explained in the above-mentioned paragraphs

petitioner calling the respondent at the residence and the vice versa wherein

the both the families of the petitioner and the respondents started knowing

each other and thereafter started having a fond relationship between the

parents of both the parties with the parties before this honorable court.

E. The petitioner states that the manifestation of the love and affection that the

petitioner had for the respondent that he had made up his mind that he would

marry the respondents in the due course of time.

F. The petitioner states that the petitioner discussed the idea of getting married

with the respondents in the intervening period and thereafter both the

petitioner and the respondents therein decided to get married however by first

registering the marriage. The petitioner states that in order to register for the

marriage a process has to be followed which then prompted the petitioner to

engage a professional for the purposes of registering their marriages with the

permission of the respondent.

briefly visited the city of Amravati for the purposes of attending a family

marriage. The cousin brother namely Mayur Zamvar who is the cousin of the

respondent was informed and intimated about the decision of getting married

and thereafter the respondent duly sought help from said Mayur Zamvar.

H. The petitioner states that upon the disclosure made to Mayur Zamvar and the

aid person immediately called to the family members of both the petitioner

and the respondent and thereafter called for the family to get together for the

purposes of the deciding the dates of the marriage.

I. The Petitioner states that after both the families sat for the deciding the dates

of the marriage and finally the date was decided on 14th December 2015.

J. The petitioner however states as the registration process of getting marriage

is already underway and the same has not been intimidated to both the

families of the petitioner and the respondent and the petitioner and the

respondent families were unknown of the fact that the date of getting marriage

registered was on 14th December 2015.

K. It is important to note that both the petitioner and the respondent have

initiated the registration process for the month of October 2015 and therefore

the date was given in December 2015. The petitioner states that the facts that

the petitioner and the respondents were determined to get married in the

month of the December 2015 was not known to the family members as late as

in the month of November 2015 and therefore the respondent had disclosed

the idea that she wants to get married to the petitioner which thereafter
 prompted the said Mayur Zaver to call for the family meeting to decides on the

dates, matching of kundlis and etc.

L. The petitioner thereafter states that all the ceremonies for the marriage took

place only after the February16, 2016, where the respondent’s parents were

still oblivious to the fact that the registration of the marriage indeed took place

on 14th December 2015 whereas the family of the petitioner were well aware

of the facts. The petitioner and the respondent started cohabiting together at

the matrimonial house which is bearing the address B-601, OMM

GAGANDEEP, PLEASANT PART, MEERA ROAD EAST, THANE, 401107.

The petitioner and the respondent started cohabiting together along with the

parents at the said address.

M. The petitioner states that after marriage the petitioner was under tremendous

pressure financially and otherwise and the same is known to the respondent

and as a result of which it was a jointly consented and decided that they will

postpone the plans of the honeymoon till the time the financial position of both

the petitioner and the respondent is on a boot standing. The Petitioner states

that the respondent had by then has been terminated from the office

immediately after the marriage.

N. The petitioner states that immediately thereafter that is as early as the month

of April, 2016, the respondent started quarreling and arguing with the

petitioner’s mother for the reasons best known to her for small and irrelevant

trivial issues. The petitioner states that as the arguments over the trivial

issues were hampering the mental peace of the petitioner, the petitioner
 decided to move to a rental place along with the respondent in an attempt to

reconcile the disputes and the differences between the respondent and the

mother of the petitioner. The petitioner moved to a rental premise bearing the

address at Airwing,4th Floor, 102, gayatri Dham, Pleasant park, Meera Road

East, Thane, 401107, which is in a very close proximity to the matrimonial

house and the parents’ house of the petitioner.

O. The petitioner states that the attempt made by the petitioner to reconcile

between the respondent and the mother of the petitioner, even though he was

facing the financial difficulty, he was forced to make a deposit of Rs.40,000

and a pay a monthly rent of 8000rs apart from the other incidental charges

towards the rental premises that he was forced to. The petitioner states that in

the absence of the parents of the petitioner, the behavior of the respondent

towards the petitioner had changed drastically and that the respondent by

then has started arguing and hampering the mental peace of the petitioner. It

is further necessary stated that, all the jeweler that was given by the mother of

the petitioner was returned in the feat of rage by the respondent to the

petitioner without assigning any reason thereof.

P. The petitioner states that the petitioner once again tried to reconcile with the

respondent by making various methods of reconciliation events. The

petitioner states that one of the attempts chosen by the petitioner which is

also agreed by the respondent to go on a trek to ____________ which is very

enthusiastically arranged entirely by the petitioner.

groups which have come and converged in the starting point of the trek, the

petitioner along with the respondents introduced to various other people’s and

among them was one lady by the name Kunika Barai who was present along

with this own group. The said Kunika Barai had also merely exchanged the

pleasantries with the petitioner and the respondent together and the petitioner

introduced the respondent as his wife.

R. The petitioner states that even after returning from the said trek, the petitioner

and the respondent were living amicably with each other till about the month

February 2017 wherein the respondent behavior towards the petitioner

changed further drastically and by now the respondent started suspecting

without any reason on the petitioner acts and actions. The petitioner states

that sometimes during this February 2017 where the marriage anniversary of

the petitioner and the respondent was fast approaching, the petitioner decided

to give a surprise gift to the respondent to which the petitioner sought help

from the friends of the petitioner including the said Kunika Barai. It is

necessary to note herein that the said Kunika Barai was having a good and

amicable relationship with both the petitioner and the respondent as being a

friend to both the parties. The petitioner states that the gift given was a gold

pendant and which was given for the purposes of the 1st Marriage

anniversary in February 2017. The petitioner states that for their 1st marriage

anniversary the petitioner and the respondent chose to keep it low as the
 intended financial problems that the both the petitioner and the respondent

were having that time.

S. However, the behavior instead of all the love and care taken by the petitioner

for the respondent, the respondent’s behavior still did not change towards the

petitioner and respondent continued to suspect each and every act of the

petitioner grew by the day. The petitioner thereafter states that not

understanding the veracity of the said friend Kunika Barai had with both the

petitioner and the respondent, the respondent started blaming of supposedly

having an affair with the said Kunika. The petitioner states that even after

confronting all the evidence, the respondent's attitude did not change even

after showing that there is no such affair with the said kunika barai.

T. The petitioner states that the petitioner was shock and surprise that in the

month of March 2017, the petitioner had found that somebody has hacked

into the personal profile of the petitioner's Facebook profile and was writing all

sorts of onerous and delinquents’ statements by naming the said Kunika Barai

on the Facebook page hereto attached as Exhibit C collectively the

screenshots of the Facebook page of the petitioner. The petitioner having

knowledge of such an illegal and unlawful act taking place and upon

understanding that there is a gross and unlawful violation of the petitioner, the

petitioner reported the near police station that is at Kashimera Police station,

Thane at Meera Road and reported such an illegal act which led to the

violation of privacy of the petitioner.

immediately register the complaint of the petitioner and to immediately lodge

a non-cognizable complaint. Hereto attached of the copy ______ NC

dated______.

V. The petitioner states that after lodging the complaint and getting an NC

against the illegal act as stated above, the respondent shockingly disclosed

that all the unlawful statements that as mentioned above (exhibit __) above

was indeed done by the respondent by taking a unconsented control over the

Facebook profile of the petitioner and writing all the onerous and defamatory

statement against the petitioner and accusing the said Kunika Barai to have

an affair with the petitioner on an open public profile which thereafter caused

extreme harm loss to the petitioner. The petitioner states that after coming to

know about such shocking revelations by the respondent was left in deep

shock as the petitioner’s own wife was engaged in such malafied act of

defaming both the petitioner in the open profile.

W. The petitioner states that even after the shocking act done by the respondent,

the petitioner tried to hold calmness and therefore tried to explain in detailed

the amicable relationship the said Kunika Barai has with both the respondent

and the petitioner. It is also necessary to note that the act done by the

respondent by defaming both the Kunika barai and the petitioner was

admitted by the respondent when she was on telephone call with the said

Kunika Barai and her sister. It is necessary to note that in the month of

January 2017, both the petitioner and the respondent were compelled to
 come back to the matrimonial house and both the petitioner and the

respondent to cohabit together along with the parents of the petitioner as the

mother of the petitioner was severely unwell. It is necessary to note that in

spite of having the severe ill health of the mother of the petitioner, the

respondent habit and actions did not even change even a bit and the

respondent continued her act of unnecessarily and without reason suspecting

the petitioner causing the petitioner extreme mental pressure and stress.

X. The petitioner thereafter states that the mother of the petitioner was thereafter

hospitalized in the month of June/July 2017 as the mother was having last

stage cancer and it was the duty of the petitioner to handle everything in the

family whereas the respondent was doing negligible activity to take care of the

petitioner. The petitioner states that the mother of the petitioner sadly expired

on December 14, 2017. However, despite knowing the amount of grief the

petitioner had due to the untimely death of the mother of the petitioner, the

respondent never cared for the feelings of the petitioner had that time.

Y. The Petitioner states that thereafter, the family friends of the Petitioner,

including one Mr. Mangesh Sawant and his wife, Mrs. Monika Mangesh

Sawant would visit them. However, the Respondent was not inclined to stay in

amicable environment with the Petitioner, and instead of cohabiting amicably

with the Petitioner, the Respondent would state everything to the said Mr.

Mangesh and his wife.

Z. . The Petitioner states that despite all endeavors being done by the petitioner

to aid the respondent to stay to cohabit in an amicable environment. The

the petitioner and travel outside the city of Bombay.

AA. The petitioner states that even after confronting the respondent and

questioning where the Respondent would travel without informing the

petitioner (the petitioner being the lawfully wedded husband) the respondent

would not provide the details of her sudden absence from the petitioner. The

petitioner states that on one occasion during the festivities of Ganpati during

the year 2018, the petitioner had made plans for taking the respondent out on

dinner. It is necessary to note that even the said Mr. Mangesh and his wife

was also invited however the said Mr. Mangesh and his wife refused to come

with the petitioner for dinner as they realised that the respondent was in the

habit of lying on each and every issue.

BB. The petitioner states that the petitioner just before leaving the matrimonial

house with the respondent for having dinner, the petitioner once again

confronted the respondent to ascertain the truth behind respondent sudden

and abrupt disappearance from the house, without informing the petitioner.

The respondent would respond in the same manner as above, that is she

would refuse to divulge the details of her sudden and abrupt absence from the

matrimonial house and the companionship from the petitioner.

CC. The petitioner states that when the petitioner sought an explanation from

the said Mr. Mangesh and his wife as to the nature and character of the

Respondent, the said Mr. Sawant would reply stating that they do not wish to
 engage themselves in attempting to reconcile the disputes and the differences

which were cropping up in the matrimonial life of the petitioner.

DD. The petitioner states that on one evening in the month of December 2018

the said Mr. Sawant and his wife had come over to the matrimonial house of

petitioner, to meet family of the respondent and the petitioner together and the

family to ascertain what's wrong in the matrimonial house and to clear the

disputes between the petitioner and the respondent .however, the petitioner

was aghast to see that the respondent in his brief absence from the house the

respondent has engaged in a physical fist fight with the wife of Mr. mangesh

sawant the reason of which is best known to the Respondent.the petitioner on

seeing upon such conduct he raised grave suspicion in the mind of petitioner

as to the mentality of the respondent. Petitioner states that the respondent

thereafter visits the Kashipura police station for lodging a written complaint

against the petitioner and the said Mr. sawant and his wife for the purported

physical fight as the respondent was engaged in.

EE. The petitioner was called in the kashimira police station on date______.

which the petitioner did and after reaching the said station police the petitioner

obliged to narrate the entire factual position which the petitioner was facing

whilst his stay in the companionship of Respondent.

FF. The petitioner says that this conducts itself proves an irretrievable

breakdown of marriage where, the respondent, out of her own whims and

fancies, has chosen to audaciously lodged a police complaint at random, and

mental peace.

GG. . It is necessary to note that the respondent after leaving the police station

on the same night refused to come to the matrimonial house to cohabit with

the petitioner and left for mother’s house which was in Kalyan. The petitioner

states that this conduct too is ample proof of irretrievable breakdown of

marriage between petitioner and the respondent.

HH. The petitioner states that It is necessary to note due to the conduct of the

respondent in making baseless allegations and filing frivolous return

complaints to the police the petitioner had lost his job. The petitioner despite

attempting to reconcile by taking respondent to various counsellors including

before close relative, the conduct of the respondent did not change. The

petitioner states that in the month of august 2019 the petitioner was

threatened by the company in which he was working as he was not able to

dedicate his full time into the working of the company because he had to visit

the police station every now and then due to the conduct of the respondent.

II. The petitioner states that in the month of August 2019, the petitioner was

provided with an opportunity to visit Hong Kong as part of the official visit of

the company. The petitioner states that the respondent did not care or was

bothered to accompany the petitioner to the Airport and more so, did not

bother to even call the petitioner the entire time when the petitioner was

outside India. It is only due to the insistence and endeavors of the petitioner

that the respondent was requested to come back and cohabit with the
 petitioner only upon the arrival of the petitioner from the official tour of Hong

Kong.

JJ. The petitioner states that in the month of November 2019 when the

respondent was in the 8th month of pregnancy and when the baby shower

was done by the petitioner and his family wherein interesting to know that no

friends and relatives had come except the father and the mother of the

respondent baby shower. The said baby shower happened in the matrimonial

house of the petitioner. The baby shower has been attended by many friends

and the families of the petitioner but only father and the mother of the

respondent as she was not in the habit of making friends nor was, she social

at all.

KK. The petitioner states that immediately after the baby shower, the

respondent left the petitioner’s matrimonial house completely and didn’t come

back for months. The petitioner states that Master Sanad was born on 4th

December 2019. All the expenses of the birth of Master Sanad were borne by

the respondent however it is important to note at the costs of the expenses

that the entire procedure was requested by the petitioner to pay but the same

was refused by the respondent parents.

LL. The petitioner states that since the respondent was not at all endeavoring to

keep any contact with the petitioner. The petitioner himself would go to the

parents’ house of the respondent (where the respondent was staying

currently) and would meet the respondent, his son and his in laws personally.

The petitioner states that there has been no contact by the respondent out of
 her own will to the petitioner neither to her in law that is the parents of the

petitioner. It was only the love and affection the petitioner had for the

respondent compelled the petitioner to always visit the parents’ house of the

respondent to meet them.

MM. The petitioner states that then the pandemic happened globally and

whatever the opportunity the petitioner had to meet the respondent in person

stopped. The respondent never endeavored to call or video call the petitioner.

It was always the petitioner who would always show inclination to contact to

enquire about the health and wellbeing of his child and the respondent. The

petitioner states that as it was quite evident by then that there is nothing left in

the companionship in the matrimonial relation between the petitioner and the

respondent. Therefore, the petitioner went to respondent for entering into a

mutual divorce with the consent of the respondent. The petitioner even went

to the house of the respondent to celebrate the first birthday of Master Sanad

on 4th December 2020 where even after meeting the respondent, the

respondent did not show any inclination to stay and cohabit amicably with the

petitioner. The petitioner states that instead the parents of the respondent

started adding baseless allegations on the petitioner as the entire fault of the

breakdown of the marriage was the fault of the petitioner where the fact of the

matter that it was the complete misdoings and plethoric conducts of the

respondent which led to the irretrievable breakdown of marriage between the

petitioner and respondent.

breakdown of the marriage and as the respondent has refused to cohabit

amicable with the petitioner. The conduct of the respondent has manifested in

the filing of the present petition.

OO. The petitioner thereafter sent a legal notice on ________ explaining in

brief the facts and without prejudice to enable the end of the matrimonial bond

between the petitioner and the respondent and to request the respondent to

come up for divorce by mutual consent. The said legal notice was not

responded to by the respondent and instead the respondent made another

baseless complaint to the Kalyan police station (Women Cell) to complain

against the petitioner. The said proceedings are ensuing as on the date of the

filing of the present petition.

PP. The petitioner states that the petitioner shall rely upon the documents as

annexed on the present petition.

QQ. The petitioner shall leave on any alter amendment to the foregoing

paragraphs to the leave of this honorable court.

On the above circumstances the petitioner prays the following:

a) That the honorable court may pleas to annul the marriage solemnized

between the petitioner and the respondent dated on 14th December 2015 and

to grant divorce to the petitioner and the respondent

b) Any other orders that may be fit deem by this honorable court.

c) This honorable court may please grant the interim custody of Master Sanad

to the petitioner on account of the misconduct made by the respondent.

equal access rights of Master Sanad rights along with the conditions that may

be fit deem and proper by this honorable court.