Reply by complainant to respondent's application under Section 21 of the DV Act seeking visitation rights, with supporting affidavit
0 of 23 blanks filled
IN THE COURT OF MS. Judge's first name Judge's surname, LD. M.M.; DISTT. District, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
MC/Case number/20Case year
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Complainant's nameCOMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondent's first name Respondent's surnameRESPONDENT
REPLY ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT TO THE APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 21 OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS/SUBMISSIONS:-
1.That the present application filed by the respondent is devoid of merits and constitutes a malicious attempt to pressurise the complainant, who has already been subjected to domestic violence and harassment.
2.That the welfare of the minor child is of paramount importance and cannot be compromised under any circumstances. The respondent's violent behaviour and lack of responsibility have caused significant emotional distress to the child. The respondent has failed to demonstrate any genuine interest in the welfare of the minor child, and his application seeking visitation rights appears to be an afterthought, intended to create hurdles in the complainant's life rather than a bona fide attempt to maintain a relationship with the child.
3.While it is acknowledged that a child has the right to the love and affection of both parents, it is equally important that the exercise of such rights does not jeopardise the mental and emotional well-being of the child. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in cases such as Gaurav Nagpal v. Sumedha Nagpal (2009) 1 SCC 42, has reiterated that the welfare of the child is the sole criterion in matters of custody and visitation. In view of the respondent's past conduct, the grant of visitation rights would not be in the best interest of the minor child.
4.That the respondent has a history of aggressive and erratic behaviour, which has created an unsafe environment for both the complainant and the minor child. The complainant apprehends that the grant of visitation rights may expose the child to further harm and emotional trauma. The respondent's failure to consistently and responsibly fulfil his parental obligations disqualifies him from seeking the discretionary relief prayed for in his application.
5.That the minor child has been under the sole care and custody of the complainant, who has been ensuring that his physical, emotional and educational needs are met. Any interaction with the respondent, who has displayed a lack of empathy and responsibility, is likely to disrupt the child's routine and adversely affect his well-being.
6.That the respondent has approached this Hon'ble Court with unclean hands, concealing his violent and negligent behaviour, which has adversely impacted the complainant and the welfare of the minor child.
7.That the respondent's failure to consistently fulfil his financial and parental responsibilities demonstrates his lack of genuine concern for the welfare of the minor child. The present application is a tactical manoeuvre rather than a bona fide request.
8.That the welfare of the minor child is of paramount importance. Considering the respondent's history of aggression and neglect, the grant of visitation rights would be contrary to the best interests of the child.
9.It is submitted that the application of the respondent is not maintainable in its present form, as it fails to establish that visitation rights would be in the best interest of the minor child.
10.That the present application moved by the respondent is not maintainable and is founded upon falsehoods; the reasons stated therein are untrue, false and baseless, and the application is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
REPLY ON MERITS:-
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the application are a matter of record. However, it is denied that the proceedings initiated by the complainant are baseless or have been filed with any mala fide intent.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the application are admitted to the extent of the marriage between the parties on Date of marriage between the parties and the birth of the minor child, Title of the minor child (e.g., Master) Minor child's name, on Date of birth of the minor child.
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 of the application are wrong and are vehemently denied. It is denied that the respondent has been deprived of the minor's company, or that the respondent and the minor child have been deprived of each other's company and love, which are essential for both, especially for the welfare of the minor child. It is submitted that the violent and neglectful behaviour of the respondent has caused significant emotional and psychological harm to the minor child, and any deprivation of company has been attributable solely to the respondent's own actions.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the application are wrong and are denied. It is denied that the respondent has been making regular monthly payments to the complainant for the maintenance of the minor child. Any financial contribution made by the respondent has been irregular and insufficient to meet the needs of the minor child.
5.That the contents of paragraph 5 of the application are wrong and are denied. The judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited therein are denied as misconstrued. The respondent has selectively quoted judgments without addressing his own failure to fulfil the principles laid down therein, including the duty to ensure the welfare of the minor child.
6.That the contents of paragraph 6 of the application are wrong and are denied. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited therein is denied as misconstrued. The respondent's behaviour has not been conducive to the welfare or development of the child. Co-parenting requires mutual respect and responsibility, neither of which the respondent has demonstrated.
7.That the contents of paragraph 7 of the application are wrong and are denied. While the minor child is entitled to the love and care of both parents, such rights cannot override the concerns for safety and emotional well-being arising from the respondent's conduct.
8.That the contents of paragraph 8 of the application are wrong and are denied. The welfare of the child is indeed paramount, and it is in the best interest of the child to remain in the sole custody of the complainant, who has consistently ensured his well-being.
9.That the contents of paragraph 9 of the application are wrong and are denied. The respondent's claim of entitlement to visitation rights is baseless in light of his past behaviour and his lack of genuine concern for the welfare of the child.
10.That the contents of paragraph 10 of the application are wrong and are denied. The respondent's request for visitation rights is not made in good faith and fails to consider the adverse impact it may have upon the minor child.
11.That the contents of paragraph 11 of the application are wrong and are denied. The application lacks bona fides and has been filed with ulterior motives to harass the complainant.
The prayer portion of the application is absolutely wrong and is specifically denied.
PRAYER:-
In view of the aforementioned submissions, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
(a)Dismiss the application filed by the respondent seeking visitation rights for the minor child, with heavy costs, as the same is devoid of merits and is not in the best interest of the child; and
(b)Pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the complainant, in the interest of justice.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed accordingly.
DATEDCOMPLAINANT
PLACE : DELHITHROUGH
Advocate's first name Advocate's surname
(Advocate)
Counsel for the Complainant
Office at Advocate's office address, New Delhi-1100Office pin code (last digit).
Mob. No. +91 Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE COURT OF MS. Judge's first name, LD. M.M.; DISTT. District, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI.
MC/Case number/20Case year
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Complainant's nameCOMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondent's first name Respondent's surnameRESPONDENT
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Complainant's name, aged about Complainant's age years, D/o Sh. Complainant's father's name
R/o Complainant's residential address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the Complainant in the above-noted matter and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and am also competent to swear and file the present affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying reply to the application under Section 21 of the DV Act have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions. The contents thereof have been duly read over to me, and the same have been understood by me in my vernacular language. After fully understanding the contents thereof, I state that they are true and correct to my knowledge and belief, and no part thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT