True copy of SLP (C) No. 9854 of 2012

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Order XVI Rule 4 (1) (a)

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICITION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.9854 OF 2012 (Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India arising out of the Order dated 08.02.2012 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in MAT APPL. No. 7

0f 2012 )with A Prayer for interim relief. IN THE MATTER OF: OM PRAKASH PODDAR … PETITIONER

VERSUS RINA KUMARI …RESPONDENT

I.A. NO. OF 2012

APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN

PERSON

PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE)

PETITIONER IN PERSON

FILING INDEX

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION[C] NO.9854 OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF:

Om Prakash Poddar …Petitioner

VERSUS

Rina Kumari …Respondent

S.N Particulars Copies Court Fees

1. Memo of Appearance 1

2. Office Report on Limitation 3+1

3. Listing Performa 3+1

4. Synopsis and list of dates 3+1

5. Impugned Order/Judgment 3+1

6. SLP with Affidavit 3+1 252/-

7. ANNEXURES P-1 to P-10 3+1 20/-

8. With Prayer for Interim relief 3+1 20/-

9. Application for permission to

appear and argue in person

3+1 10/-

10. PFS 10/-

Total 312/-

Petitioner in Person

Om Prakash Poddar

Filed on: 02.03.2012



SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION[C] NO. 9854 OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS

RINA Kumari …Respondent

MEMO OF APPEARANCE

To

The Registrar Supreme Court of India New Delhi

Sir,

Please enter my appearance Petitioner-in-Person in the above mentioned matter:

New Delhi Dated this the 2nd day of March 2012

Yours faithfully,

(OM PRAKASH PODDAR) Petitioner-in-Person

INDEX

S.N Particulars Page No.

1. Office Report on Limitation ‘A’

2. Listing Performa A1-A5

3. Synopsis and list of dates B-J

4. Impugned Order dated 08.02.2012 1-2

passed by the Hon'ble High Court

of Delhi at New Delhi in MAT.APPL.

NO.7 of 2012

5. Special Leave Petition (C) with 3-17

Affidavit.

6. ANNEXURE: P-1 18-22

Copies of handicapped certificate

Concession certificate) dated

04.12.2000 issued by AIIMS, New

Delhi and Translated copies of

Cremation Certificate dated

17.11.2007 of father of the

petitioner Issued by Cremation

Authority, Manihari, Katihar,

Bihar.


Copies of medical certificate

(Discharge Summary) dated 16.11.2010

Issued by AIIMS, New Delhi of Mother

of the Petitioner.


Copies of the police complaint

Dated 30.5.2011 to the Chowki

Incharge, P.P. Dwarka, Sector-10,

Dwarka Court, New Delhi-75

9. ANNEXURE: P-4 30

A Copy of Order dated 30.05.2011

passed by the Principal Judge,

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New

Delhi in Suit No. HMA-700/10

10. ANNEXURE: P-5 31

A copy of Order dated 06.06.2011




11. ANNEXURE: P-6 32-38

Copies of RTI reply dated

30.08.2011 Furnished by the Office

of Principal Judge, Family Court,

Dwarka Court, New Delhi.

12. ANNEXURE: P-7 39-60

Copies of Ex-parte evidence of

Petitioner dated 01.08.2011,

Evidence of friend of the

petitioner by way of Affidavit

dated 27.08.2011 and Evidence of

mother and sister of the petitioner

by way of Affidavit dated

07.09.2011 in Suit No. HMA-700/10

before Principal Judge, Family

Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi.

13. ANNEXURE: P-8 61

A Copy of Order dated 07.09.2011




14. ANNEXURE: P-9 62-73

Copies of Judgment dated

16.12.2011 Passed by the Family

court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi in

HMA Case No.678 Of 2010

15. ANNEXURE: P-10 74-78

Copies of receiving of complaint

Letter dated 07.02.2012 to the

Secretary, Delhi High Court Legal

Service Committee, Delhi High

Court, New Delhi.

16. Application for seeking permission 79-80

to appear and Argue the special

leave Petition in person.

‘A’


CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICITION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.9854 OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF :

OM PRAKASH PODDAR … PETITIONER

VERSUS

RINA KUMARI …RESPONDENT

OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION

1. The Petition is/are within time.

2. The petitioner is barred by time and there is

delay of days in filing the same against order

dt. and petition for condonation of days

delay had been filed.

3. There is delay of days in refilling the

petition and petition for condonation of

days delay in refilling has been filed.

New Delhi.

Dated.02.03.2012.

BRANCH OFFICER.

LISTING PERFORMA


1. Nature of the Matter ………CIVIL ………………………………………

2. Name(s) of Petitioner(s) OM PRAKASH PODDAR

2-a Email I.D. [email protected]

3. Name(s) of Respondent(s): RINA KUMARI

3-a Email I.D. Not know.

4. Number of the case S.L.P.(C) No. of 2012.

5. Advocate for Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)


5-a Email I.D. [email protected]

6. Advocate for Respondent(s)…

6-a Email I.D. Not know.

7. Section …………XI………………………………………………………………….

8. Date of the impugned order…08.02.2012…………………….

8A. Name of Hon’ble Judge Hon’ble Justice Ms Veena

Birbal

8B. In Land Acquisition Matters:-

(i) Notification /Govt. Order No.(u/s 4, 6)

……N.A.…………………………………………….

Dated ……N.A.……………. issued by Centre/ State

of……N.A.………

(ii)Exact purpose of acquisition & village involve

……………N.A.…………………………….

8C. In Civil Matters:-

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

(i) Suit No., Name of Lower Court HMA No.678/2010

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi

Date of Judgment……………16.12.2011.………………………………………

8D. In Writ Petition:-

“Catchword” of other similar matters- ……………N.A.…………

8E.

.

In the case of Motor Vehicle Accident Matters:

Vehicle No …………………………………N.A.……………………………………………...

8F In Service Matters

(i) Relevant service rule, if any ………………N.A.……………

(ii) G.O./Circular /Notification, if applicable or

in question …………N.A. ……………...

8G. In Labour Industrial Disputes Matters:

I.D. Reference /Award No., If applicable

………………N.A.………………………………

9. Nature of Urgency……………Interim relief has been

prayed for ………………………………

10. In case it is a Tax Matter:

(a) Tax amount involved in the matter………N.A. ………

(b)Whether a reference statement of the case was

called for or rejected…NA..……….

(c) Whether similar tax matters of same parties

filed earlier (may be for earlier/other Assessment

year)? ………………N.A. …………………………………………………

(d) Exemption Notification /Circular No. ……N.A.……

11. Valuation of the matter ………N.A.……………………………………………

12. Classification of the matter:

(Please fill up the number & name of relevant

category with sub category as per list circulated.)

No. of Subject Category with full name….. 16

Family Law Matters

No. of sub- Category with full name. 1607

Matters under Hindu Marriage Act

13. Title of the Act Involved (Center/State): Center

14. (a)Sub-classification (indicate Section/Article of

the statute) Hindu Marriage Act 1955

(b) Sub-section involved: 13(1)(ia)

(c) Title of the Rules involved (Center/State)……

State……

(d) Sub-classification (Indicate Rule/Sub-Rule of

the statute) .DO

15. Point of law and question of law raised in the case

: Whether the High Court delayed to struck down

the earlier judgment and order given by the above

said Trial court?

16. Whether matter is not to be listed before any

Hon’ble Judge?

Mention the name of the Hon’ble Judge ……Hon’ble

Justice Sinha……………………………..

17. Particulars of identical/similar cases, if any

(a)Pending cases…………N.A.………………………………………....

(b)Decided cases with citation ……………N.A.……………………

17A

.

Was S.L.P. /Appeal /Writ filed against same

impugned Judgment /Order earlier? If yes,

Particulars ……………………N.A. ………………………………………………………

18. Whether the petition is against interlocutory/final

order/decree in the case…interlocutory order

19. If it is a fresh matter, please state the name of

the High Court and the Coram in the Impugned

Judgment/Order …High Court of Delhi, New Delhi in

the court of Hon’ble Justice Veena Birbal

20. If the matter was already listed in the Court:

a) When was is listed? ……………N.A.……………………………………………..

b) What was the Coram? ………………N.A.……………………………………………

c) What is the direction of the Court. ………N.A.…………

21. Whether a date was has already been fixed either by

Court or on being mention, for the hearing of

matter? If so, please indicate the date fixed

……N.A.…………………………………….

22. Is there a Caveator? If so, whether a notice has

been issued to him?…N.A.………………….

23. Whether date entered in the Computer?

………NA..………………………………………...

24. If it is a criminal matter, please state:

(a) Whether accused has surrendered …………N.A.…………………

(b) Nature of Offence, i.e., Convicted under

Section with Act …………N.A.……………

(c) Sentence awarded ………N.A.…………………………………………………………

(d)Sentence already undergone by the

accused……N.A.…………

24 (e) (i) FIR /RC/etc …N.A……………

Date of Registration of FIR etc. N/A

Name & place of the Police Station.. NA.

(ii) Name & Place of Trial Court Learned Session

Judge. ….NA

(iii)Case No. in Trial Court and Date of

Judgement……..NA

(iv) Name & Place of 1st Appellate Court…NA

Case No. in 1st Appellate Court & date of

Judgement…….NA

[OM PRAKASH PODDAR]


Dt. 02.03.2012.

SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES

The Petitioner is filing the present special leave

petition against the order dated 08.02.2012 passed

by the Hon’ble Justice Veena Birbal of Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Mat Appeal No. 7 0f

2012 whereby the Hon’ble High Court has given a

long date after 5 months as the next date of

hearing on 06.07.2012 without considering the eight

year long criminal conspiracy by the respondent and

her associates which has resulted in untimely death

of the handicapped father of the Petitioner further

which may result in untimely death of the bedridden

mother of the Petitioner and subsequently abuse of

Trial court process which has resulted in failure

of justice causing irreparable loss and injury.

24.6.2004 Marriage between the Petitioner and

the respondent was solemnized on

24.6.2004 at (Katihar), Bihar with

misrepresentation of bride and

forcibly under life threat at gun

point. There after the Petitioner has

been kept under force by the

Respondent’s family and the associates

till date. Force never ceased to

operate.

15.4.2005 Father of the Respondent came and took

the Respondent along with her to his

Government residence at Dhanbad

(Bihar), now in Jharkhand and never

came back to the matrimonial home.

15.11.2007 Petitioner has lost his handicapped

father due to lack of care and support

and persistent threatening from the

Respondent and her family, who was

undergoing treatment at AIIMS and died

on 15.11.2007. Petitioner has now

reduced to two member family. The

Respondent and his family did not even

visit and participate in the last

rituals of the Petitioner’s father.

Copies of handicapped certificate and

cremation certificate of father of the

petitioner dated 04.12.2000 and

17.11.2007 respectively are annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure: P-1

(pages 18 to 22).

30.03. 2010 Respondent with mal intention and to

harass and humiliate the Petitioner

has filed a false and frivolous case

against the Petitioner and his mother.

Respondent has filed an application

under section 12 of Domestic Violence

Act, 2005, vide case no. 9P/2010

before Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Begusarai on 30th March 2010 later

forwarded in the court of First Class

Judicial Magistrate, Mr. Atul Kumar

Pathak, Begusarai Court, Bihar on 6th

June 2010.

25.10.2010 Petitioner filed a petition U/s 13 (1)

(ia) of the HMA, 1955 vide H.M.A Case

No. 700 of 2010 seeking a decree of

divorce before the court of Ld.

Principal Judge Family Courts, Dwarka,

Delhi without the knowledge of mal

intention of Respondent. Petitioner

has come to know about the

respondent’s mal intention on the date

of hearing of HMA suit no. 700/2010 on

9/02/2011

16.11.2010 Mother of the Petitioner suffered with

severe Asthma stroke and needed ICU

health care. Mother who is chronic

asthmatic, COAD and surviving on only

43% of oxygen and rest 47% is C02 in

her blood, as per ABG report. At the

same time she is thyroid patient. She

has been advised to keep on home

oxygen. Petitioner has to render all

domestic help 24x7 to his mother.

Copies of medical certificate of

mother of the Petitioner dated

16.11.2010 is attached herewith and

marked as Annexure: P-2 (pages 23 to 24 ).

30.5.2011 Petitioner was stopped and beaten by

the goons of the Respondent family at

the entry gate of Trial Court on

30.5.2011. Copies of the police

complaint dated 30.5.2011 made by the

Petitioner in this regard is annexed


(pages 25 to 29).

30.05.2011 On the same date Ms Deepa Sharma,

Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka

Court, New Delhi stopped the whole

court proceedings and did not sit and

chair any of the cases, in turn, the

order sheet being generated alleging

the petitioner for requesting for

adjournment of the court proceedings.

A Copy of Order dated 30.05.2011 is

attached herewith and marked as

Annexure: P-4 (pages 30 to 30).

06.06.2011 As a result of that the Respondent was

being Ex-parte on 06.06.2011 by the

Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma. A

copy of Order dated 06.06.2011 is

attached herewith and marked as

Annexure: P-5 (pages 31 to 31).

25.07.2011 Petitioner has filed three RTIs and

two appeals (which are pending before

Ms. Poonam A. Bamba’s court, Rohini

court, Delhi) against the

unconstitutional and undemocratic act

of Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma.

Copies of unsatisfactory RTI reply

furnished by the O/o Principal Judge

Family Court on 30.08.2011 filed by

the Petitioner on 25.07.2011 in this

regard is annexed herewith and marked

as Annexure: P-6 (pages 32 to 38).

01.08.2011 That during the course of proceedings,

Petitioner led his Evidence by way of

Affidavit on 01.08.2011. Petitioner in

order to strengthen his case also led

the evidence of his Mother – Asha

Devi, Sister- Sneh Lata and Friend –

Digvijay Singh on 27.08.2011 and

07.09.2011. Copies of Ex-parte

evidence of Petitioner dated

01.08.2011, Evidence by way of

Affidavit dated 27.08.2011 and

07.09.2011 are attached herewith and

marked as Annexure: P-7 (pages 39 to 60).

07.09.2011 That 07.09.2011 was fixed for coming

up for ex-parte evidence. However,

Principal Judge refused to tender ex-

parte evidence and chose to transfer

the case to Mr. Deepak Jagotra’s

Family court in Dwarka. Thus, the Case

was transferred to the court of Mr.

Deepak Jagotra, Judge Family Courts,

Dwarka, Delhi and was renumbered as

H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010. A Copy of

Order dated 07.09.2011 is attached


(pages 61 to 61).

16.12.2011 That the court of Mr. Deepak Jagotra,

Judge Family Courts, Dwarka, Delhi in

H.M.A Case No. 678 of 2010 vide its

Order erred in holding that the

Petitioner has failed to show even a

single incident of alleged cruelty

caused by the Respondent, Although

Petitioner had produced four witnesses

but Petitioner’s witnesses were being

negated on the ground of “identical

statement”. Further, his witnesses

were being falsified and blamed no

legs to stand and thus baseless and he

has made up ground for the sake of

making out a case against the

Respondent, however, passed a decree

of Judicial separation on the ground

of desertion by the Respondent. Copies

of judgment dated 16.12.2011 passed in

HMA Case No. 678 of 2010 is annexed


(pages 62 to 73).

05.01.2012 That the Petitioner approached the

Delhi High Court Legal Service

Committee to file an appeal.

07.02.2012 That the Legal Aid counsel filed an

appeal concealing the material facts

of Judicial nexus with the respondent

and abuse of Trial court process

without the consent of Petitioner.

Copies of receiving of complaint

letter to the Secretary, DHCLSC dated

07.02.2012 is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure: P-10 (pages 74 To 78).

08.02.2012 That the court of Hon’ble Justice

Veena Birbal of Hon’ble Delhi High

Court in Mat Appeal case No. 7 of 2012

vide its order given a long date after

5 months as the next date of hearing

on 06.07.2012 without considering the

eight year long criminal conspiracy by

the respondent and her associates

which has resulted in untimely death

of the handicapped father of the

Petitioner further which may result in

untimely death of the bedridden mother

of the Petitioner and subsequently

abuse of Trial court process which has

resulted in failure of justice.

02.03.2012 Hence the Special Leave Petition.

$23

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ MAT.APP. 7/2012

OM PRAKASH PODDAR ..... Appellant

Through Mr Jai Bansal, Advocate

versus

RINA KUMARI ........... Respondent

Through None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

% O R D E R

08.02.2012

CM No. 2423/2012 (exemption)

Exemption as prayed is allowed subject to just

exceptions.

MAT.APP. 7/2012

Issue notice to the respondent to show cause as to why

the appeal be not admitted, returnable on 06.07.2012.

Trial court record be also requisitioned for the next

date. Necessary steps be taken within one week.

VEENA BIRBAL, J

FEBRUARY 08, 2012

srb

F O R M – 28


(Order XVI Rule 4(1) (a)

CIVIL APPELALTE JURISDICTION

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION

(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)

S.L.P. (Civil) No. 9854 of 2012

WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF

POSITION OF THE PARITES

BEFORE THE HIGH COURT BEFORE THIS COURT

BETWEEN

Om Prakash Poddar

S/o Late D.N Poddar,

R/o RZF – 893, Netaji Subhas Marg

Raj Nagar – II, Palam Colony

New Delhi - 110077

PETITIONER

VERSUES

Rina Kumari

D/o Surendra Narayan Poddar,

RC, Marketing Division,

Indian Oil Corporation,

Barauni Refinery,

P.S. Barauni,

Distt: Begusarai, Bihar RESPONDENT

To

Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India

and His Companion Judges of the

Supreme Court of India.

The Special Leave Petition of the

Petitioner most respectfully showeth :-

1. The petitioner is filing the present

special leave petition against the interim

impugned order dated 08.02.2012 passed by

the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New

Delhi in Mat Appl No. 7 0f 2012 whereby

and where the Hon’ble High Court

unnecessary delayed the petition without

considering that the real issue involved

in this case for consideration of the

gravity and seriousness of the petitioner

by the Trial Court which has resulted in

failure of justice.

2. QUESTION OF LAW:

The following questions of the law arise

for consideration by this Hon'ble Court :

i. Whether the petition filed u/s 13

(1)(ia) of HMA, 1955 for decree of

divorce and Judgment passed a decree

of judicial separation u/s 10 of HMA

1955 without the consent of Petitioner

while the respondent was ex parte is

bad in the eyes of law and resulted in

miscarriage of justice.

ii. Whether the Trial court has committed

a grave error by stopping the whole

court proceeding to terrorize the mind

of the Petitioner and in turn

generating a false order sheet

alleging the Petitioner for requesting

for adjournment of the court

proceedings amounting to the

unconstitutional and undemocratic act

of Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma of

Trial court.

iii. Whether stopping and beating the

Petitioner at the entry gate of trial

court by the goons of respondent is

unlawful and indicator of mafia state.

iv. Whether filing a Mat appeal concealing

the material facts of judicial nexus

with the Respondent and abuse of Trial

court process without the consent of

Petitioner by the Delhi High court

Legal Service Committee, Legal Aid

Counsel is illegal.

3. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 4(2)

The petitioner states that no other

petition seeking leave to appeal has been

filed by him against the impugned judgment

and order dated 8.02.2012 passed by the

Hon’ble High court of Delhi at New Delhi

in MAT. APPL. Petition No. 7 of 2012.

4. DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 6

The annexures P-1 to P-10 produced

alongwith the SLP are true copies of the

pleadings/documents which formed part of

the records of the case in the

Court/Tribunal below against whose order

the leave to appeal is sought for in this

petition.

5. GROUNDS

Leave to appeal is sought for on the

following grounds.

i. Because the Hon’ble High Court has

committed failure to exercise its

jurisdiction to consider the gravity

and seriousness of the case in MAT.

APPL. No. 7 of 2012.

ii. Because the judgment dated 16.12.2011

passed by the court of Mr. Deepak

Jagotra, Judge Family Courts, Dwarka,

Delhi in H.M.A Case No. 678/2010 is

bad in the eyes of law and hence the

same is liable to be struck down by

the Hon’ble High Court.

iii. Because the Respondent was Ex-parte in

H.M.A Case No. 678/2010, yet the

judgment passed in favour of

Respondent.

iv. Because the crux of the whole episode

is based on two pillars i.e.

Forced/Fraudulent Marriage and

Criminal conspiracy.

v. Because the marriage between the

Petitioner and the respondent was

solemnized on 24.6.2004 at (Katihar),

Bihar with misrepresentation of bride

and forcibly under life threat at gun

point.

vi. Because the Father of the Respondent

came and took the Respondent along

with him to his Government residence

at Dhanbad(Bihar) on 15.04.2005 now in

Jharkhand. Respondent never came back

to the matrimonial home.

vii. Because the Petitioner has been kept

under force by the Respondent’s family

and the associates till date. Force

never ceased to operate.

viii. Because the Petitioner has lost his

handicapped father due to lack of care

and support and persistent threatening

from the Respondent and her family,

who was undergoing treatment at AIIMS

and died on 15.11.2007. Petitioner has

now reduced to two member family. The

Respondent and his family did not even

visit and participate in the last

rituals of the Petitioner’s father.

ix. Because there is an ill motive and a

well planned criminal conspiracy of

respondent family to kill Petitioner’s

last member of the family i.e. ailing

mother who is completely bedridden and

undergoing treatment with AIIMS in the

similar fashion as they had killed his

handicapped father. Mother who is

chronic asthmatic, COAD and surviving

on only 43% of oxygen and rest 47% is

C02 in her blood, as per ABG report.

At the same time she is thyroid

patient. She has been advised to keep

on home oxygen. Petitioner has to

render all domestic help 24x7 to his

mother.

x. Because the Respondent and her

associates have kept the Petitioner

unmarried and unemployed at the age of

39. They have virtually finished his

everything and kept him in captive

since 8 years. Petitioner and his

ailing mother are reeling under

traumatic situation with acute

depression and anxiety. Petitioner

house has been turned into symmetry

ground. The concept of Family has been

assailed. The institution of marriage

has been abused.

xi. Because the Trial Court below

committed a grave error in holding

that the Petitioner has failed to show

even a single incident of alleged

cruelty caused by the Respondent when

in view of the facts and circumstances

of the case and the evidence adduced

clearly shows the brutal, unacceptable

and unchanging acts and behaviors of

the Respondent and the threats and

acts amounting to mental cruelty

against the Petitioner and his family

members which has made it impossible

for the Petitioner to live with the

Respondent.

xii. Because the Ld. Trial Court failed to

consider that it is a settled legal

position that there cannot be

condonation if the offending spouse

continues to indulge in the commission

of further acts of cruelty either

physical or mental.

6. GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF:

Because the impugned order dated

08.02.2012 has been passed by the court of

Justice Veena Birbal, Delhi High Court,

New Delhi in Mat. Appeal-7 of 2012,

ignoring the gravity and seriousness of

the case which involves 8 year long

criminal conspiracy by the respondent and

her associates and abuse of Trial court

process.

7. MAIN PRAYER :

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed

that this Hon'ble court may please to:-

i. Grant Special Leave to Appeal against

the interim impugned order dated

08.02.2012 passed by the Hon’ble High

Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Mat.

Appl. No. 7 0f 2012.

ii. Pass any other further

orders/directions, which this Hon’ble

Court may deem fit and proper in the

facts and circumstances of the case

against the Respondent and in favor of

the Petitioner.

8. INTERIM RELIEF:

It is therefore, most respectfully prayed

that this Hon'ble court may please to:-

a) Set aside the interim impugned order

dated 08.02.2012 passed by the Hon’ble

High Court and kindly grant relief to the

Petitioner to avoid undue delay and

unnecessary harassment, as justice simply

will be denied if the ailing mother of the

Petitioner will die untimely due to

unnecessary harassment by the respondent

and her associates.

Place: New Delhi Petitioner in person

Date:02/03/2012

Settled by: Petitioner



SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C)NO.9854 OF 2012.

IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS

RINA KUMARI …RESPONDENTS

CERTIFICATE

Certified that the Special Leave Petition is

confined only to the pleadings before the

Court/Tribunal whose order is challenged and the

other documents relied upon in those proceedings.

No additional facts, documents or grounds have been

taken therein or relied upon in the Special Leave

Petition. It is further certified that the copies

of Annexures to the Special Leave Petition are

necessary to answer the question of law raised in

the Special Leave Petition or to make out grounds

urged in the Special Leave Petition for

consideration of this Hon'ble Court. This

certificate is given by the Petitioner whose

affidavit is filed in support of the Special Leave

Petition.

(OM PRAKASH PODDAR)


FILED ON: 02-03-2012.



SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION[C] NO 9854 OF 2012

IN THE MATTER OF:


VERSUS

RINA Kumari …Respondent

AFFIDAVIT

I, Om Prakash Poddar S/o Late D. N. Poddar, aged 39

years, R/o RZF/893, Neta Ji Subash Marg, Raj Nagar

Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi - 77, do hereby

solemnly affirm and state on oath as under:-

1. That I am the Petitioner in the above matter

and well conversant with the facts of the case

as such competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That the contents of the accompanying Special

Leave Petition [para 1 to 8.], [Page 3 to 17]

and List of Dates (Page B to J’], and I, As.

and application for seeking permission to

appear and arguing in-person having understood

the contents thereof I say that the facts state

therein are correct which are based on the

official record.

3. That the Special Leave Petition Paper Book

contains total 80 pages.’

4. That the annexures are true copies of their

respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

I, the above-named deponent do hereby verify that

the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to

my knowledge and belief. No part of the same is

false and nothing material has been concealed

therefrom.

Verified at New Delhi on this the 2nd day of March

2012.

DEPONENT

ANNEXURE-P-1

CONECESSION CERTIFICATE Appendix No.1/36

Form for the purpose of grant of rail concession

to orthopedically Handicapped/Paraplegic/persons/

Patients to be used by the Government Doctor.

That shri Mr. D.N.Poddar 10537/2000 whose

particulars are mentioned below is bonafide

Orthopedically Handicapped/Paraplegic

person/patient and CANNOT TRAVEL WITHOUT THE

ASSISTANCE OF AN ESCORT.

Particulars of the Orthopedically

Handicapped/Paraplegic person/patient:

(a) Address.. Sonaili, Katihar, Bihar

(b) Father’s/Husband’s Name.. Late G. Poddar

(c) Age.. 67 (d) Sex.. M

(e) Nature of Handicap (To be written by Doctor

whether the disability is Temporary or

permanent).. Permanent

(f) Cause of loss of functional capacity.. Left

above knee amputation

(g) Signature or Thumb impression of

Orthopaedically handicapped/paraplegic

person/patient: (not necessary for those whose both

hands are missing or non functional)……………………………………

……………………………………………….

(Signature of Government Doctor)

Place……..AIIMS, New Delhi

Date…..4/12/2000

Clear seal of Government ………………………………………..

Hospital Clinic

Strike out where not applicable

Note: (1) The certificate should be issued only to

those Orthopaedically Handicapped/Paraplegic

person/patients WHO CANNOT TRAVEL WITHOUT THE

ASSISTANCE OF AN ESCORT. The photo must be signed

and stamped in such a way that Doctor’s signature

and stamp appears partly on the photo and partly on

the certificate.

(2) In case of temporary disability, the

certificate will be valid for five years from the

date of issue. In the case of permanent disability

the certificate will remain valid for (1) Five

years, in case of person up to the age of 25 years,

(2) Ten years, in case of person in the age of 26

to 35 years (3) In case of persons above the age 35

years the certificate will remain valid for whole

life of the concerned person. After expiry of the

period of validity of the certificate, the person

is required to obtain a fresh certificate. A

Photostat copy of the certificate is accepted for

the purpose of grant of concession. The original

certificate will have to be produced for inspection

at the time of purchase of concession ticket and

during the journey. If demanded

(3) No alteration in the form is permitted.

Printed by: DASS OPTICIANS)4, Kalkaji, New Delhi-19

DASS HEARING AID CENTRE Tel:6439423,6231423

CREMATION CERTIFICATE

I certify that the name of dead body Deep Narayan

Poddar Father/husband of dead body’s name Late

Govind Poddar Address Sonaili P.S. Kadwa District

Katihar State Bihar Age of dead body 70 seventy

years approximately name of cremator Om Prakash

name of father/husband of cremator Deep Narayan

Poddar Address Sonaili P.S. Kadwa, P.O. Sonaili

Address Sonaili P.S. Kadwa P.O. Sonaili District

Katihar State Bihar Name of Dom/Pandit Tuntun from

whom death Fire obtained and cremated

mother/father/son/daughter of which description is

mentioned in Block Development Officer, Manihari,

District Katihar Account No. 14 page No. 95 serial

no. 883.

Cremation/ buried/Samadhi/Jal Samdhi

Today dated 17/11/2007 day Saturday at the time of

cremation time hour 2=15 minute the description of

death cremation is noted.

Om prakash Tuntun

Cremator’s name Dom/Pandit

signature Signature

Block Development officer, All India Abdul Akhara

Manihari, Katihar (Bihar) Varah Panth, of Rayata

Jogi Mahant Shri Shri 1008

Baba Paras Nath,

Kali Mandir, Purvi Ghat, Manihari Masan

Pujari, Manihari, Katihar (Bihar)

PREM NATH AGHORI

Signature

ANNEXURE P-2

M R 2 Discharge Summary

All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi-

110029

DISCHARGE SUMMERY

CR. No. 181877 O.P.D.O. Date of Admission/

Discharge

D.O.A- 16/11/10

D.O.D- 23/11/10

Name ASHA RANI DEVI AGE 70 YEARS SEX F

History and condition on admission

A 70 year old female presented under complain of

breathlessness, cough, under expectoration,

swelling all over the body and 12 days of Uttered

seriousness since 1 day. She had the exposures to

chullah smoke since 30 years. She is a k/c/o COAD

on irregular treatment.

o/E- pt is drowsy. Pulse =80/min, BP=110/70mm Hg.

Pedal oedemea + on chest examination, B/L Ronchi +

The rest of the general & systemic examination was

nostril.

Hospital course

The pt. was managed under IV antibiotics.

(Augmentine, Azithral). Pt. was kept on O2

inhalation through nosal prongs.

The investigation reveals that pt. had

Hypothyroidism also. She is started on

levothyroxine 25 mg OD.

Pt is not maintaining saturation & had low PO2 off

oxygen, so pt. is discharge under advice to take

Home oxygen.

ANNEXURE P-3

To, Date: 30/05/2011

The Chowki Incharge

P.P. Dwarka

Sector-10, Dwarka Court.

New Delhi-110075

Sub: Persistent Life threatening by Sh. Surendra

Narayan Poddar and his family members

Sir,

The applicant most respectfully submits as

under:-

1. That (i) Shri Surendra Narayan Poddar,

Assistant Manager (RC), Marketing Division, IOC

Baruni Refinary, (ii) Ms. Anita Poddar W/O Sh.

Surendra Narayan Poddar, (iii) Rina Kumari, D/O

Sh. Surendra Narayan Poddar, (iv) Rupam kumari

alias Dolly D/O Sh. Surendra Narayan Poddar

and (v) Anupam Kumar S/O Sh. Surendra Narayan

Poddar all R/O R.H. 5/6, Baruni Refinary,

Township, Begusarai, Bihar and also at Jagdish

Path, Bailey Road Apartments, 206, Malti

Bihari, Patna, Bihar and (vi) Anuja Kumari,

alias Annu, and (vii) her husband (Bank P.O.),

both R/O of Pokharia, Begusarai are giving

persistent threat to kidnap and kill Shri Om

Prakash, aged 37 years, S/O Late Shri Deep

Narayan Poddar and Asha Devi, age 64 year,

widow of Late Shri Deep Narayan Poddar both

R/O Sonaili, Near Durga Mandir, Katihar, Bihar-

855114 and presently residing at RZH-650, Near

Kennedy Public School, Raj Nagar, Part-2, Palam

Colony, New Delhi-110077.

2. That the goons of the above noted persons have

physically assaulted and manhandled the

applicant on the date of hearing i.e.

30.05.2011 of the case pending before the

Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka Court,

New Delhi at the entrance gate of the Court

between 10.15 AM to 10.30 AM.

3. That the widow mother Smt. Asha Devi, 64 year

old, is a senior citizen and not putting up

well and is a patient of chronic Asthma, COPD,

Obsessive Sleep Apnea (OSA) and hyperthyroidism

and is under treatment with AIIMS and being

advised to keep on home oxygen and is also

suffering from various old age diseases, is

residing at her Sonaili, Near Durga Mandir,

Kadwa, Katihar house alone and reeling under

persistent life threat by the above noted

family members.

4. That there is a serious security threat of life

to shri Om Prakash and his widow mother Asha

Devi from the Petrol Pump mafias who have nexus

with the Shri Surendra Narayan Poddar, who is

Assistant Manager (RC), Marketing Division,

Indian Oil Corporation, Baruni Refinary and

his above noted family members.

5. That there has been a previous instance of

muscle flexing by Shri Surendra Narayan Poddar

and his family members as a result of that the

applicant has lost his father prematurely on

15th Nov, 2007 and his family has now reduced

to two member family i.e. Asha Devi and Om

Prakash.

6. That the above said persons have been sending

goondas like elements at the house of the

complainant/applicant who have been

threatening the complainant with dire

consequences and have showered that they would

kill me and I should immediately withdraw my

case from the court or else they would bury me

alive. Due to their threats I have to leave my

house frequently and I am living a fugitive

life, my life has been made miserable due to

their acts and conducts.

In view of the above submissions made above it

is most respectfully prayed that this act of

persistent threatening by the above noted

family members has led to traumatic situation

and will further prove to be disastrous for

Shri Om Prakash and his mother to sustain their

life peacefully. I therefore request the

concern administration to take necessary action

to protect the life and property of Shri Om

Prakash and his old age mother in the interest

and furtherance of justice.

It is prayed accordingly.

Applicant

Om Prakash

Copy to:

1. SHO., P.S. Dwarka, New Delhi

2. Principal Judge, Family Court, Dwarka Court,

New Delhi

3. The Hon’ble Chief Justice, Delhi High Court,

New Delhi-110003

4. Commissioner of Police, I.P. Estate,

New Delhi

5. DCP (South West District), New Delhi.

ANNEXURE: P-4

Suit No. HMA-700/10

Om Prakash Vs Rina Kumari

30.05.2011

Present: Petitioner in Person.

Replication not filed. Petitioner requests for

adjournment. At request adjourned for replication

and issues on 06.06.2011.

Deepa Sharma

Principal Judge

Family Court

Dwarka New Delhi

30.05.2011

ANNEXURE: P-5

Suit No. HMA-700/10

Om Prakash Poddar Vs Rina Kumari

06.06.2011

Present: Petitioner in Person.

None for the respondent.

Written statement has also not been filed by

the respondent. Two application for filing the

documents filed on behalf of the petitioner along

with copies. Case called several times since

morning but none appeared on behalf of the

respondent. Respondent is proceeded ex-parte.

For ex-parte evidence, to come up on

07.09.2011.

Deepa Sharma

Principal Judge

Family Court

Dwarka New Delhi

06.06.2011

ANNEXURE: P-6

ANNEXURE: P-7

ANNEXURE: P-8

Om Prakash Poddar Vs Rina Kumari

HMA No.-700/2010

07.09.2011

Pr: Petitioner in Person.

Respondent is Ex Parte.

The petitioner has submitted that he has

filed one complaint against this court and has made

a request to transfer the matter to some other

court.

At request, the matter is transferred to the

court of Sh. Deepak Jagotra, Ld. Judge, Family

Court, Dwarka, New Delhi.

The petitioner is directed to appear before the

transferee court on 09.09.2011 at 10 A.M. Ahlmad is

directed to send the file complete in all respects

to the transferee court immediately.

(DEEPA SHARMA)

PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT,

DWARKA, N.D./07.09.2011

True Copy

ANNEXURE: P-9

IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK JAGOTRA, JUDGE, FAMILY

COURT, DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI

DECREE SHEET IN PETITION FOR DIVORCE/CONJUGAL

RIGHTS/PERMANENT ALMONY/EX-PARTE

(ORDER XX RULE 7 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURES)

HMA No. 678/10

Om Prakash Poddar,

S/o late D.N.Poddar

R/o RZH-650, RZH-Block

Near Kennedy Public School,

Raj Nagar-II,

New Delhi-110077. Petitioner

Versus

Smt. Rina Kumari

W/o Sh. Om Prakash Poddar




Barauni Refinery, P.S. Barauni,

Distt. Begusarai, Bihar. Respondent

Claim for U/s 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act,

1955.

Plaint presented on the 25.10.2010.

This petition coming on 16.12.2011 for final

disposal before me in the presence of:

Petitioner in person.

Respondent is Ex-parte.

It is ordered that the Judicial Separation is

passed in favour of the petitioner and against the

respondent under the Provision of Section 10 of the

Hindu Marriage Act.

And it is further ordered that Respondent also

pay a sum of Rs. Nil as cost of the proceedings.

COST OF PROCEEDINGS

S.No. PETITIONER Rs. S.No. RESPONDENT Rs.

Stamps for Petitioner 20.00 1. Stamps for exhibits Nil

1. Stamp for power Nil 2. Stamp for petition Nil

2. Stamp for exhibits Nil 3. Advocate fee Nil

3. Advocate fee Nil 4. Substance fee Wits Nil

4. Substance for Nil 5. Misc. Nil

Process

5. Publication fee Nil

6. Service for Nil

Process

7. Misc. Nil

Total Rs.20.00 Rs. Nil

GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND THE SEAL OF THE COURT

16.12.2011

(Deepak Jagotra)

Judge, Family Courts

Dwarka, New Delhi

IN THE COURT OF SH. DEEPAK JAGOTRA: JUDGE, FAMILY

COURTS, DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI

HMA No.678/10

Om Prakash Poddar,

S/o late D.N.Poddar

R/o RZH-650, RZH-Block

Near Kennedy Public School,

Raj Nagar-II,

New Delhi-110077. …………….Petitioner

Versus

Rina Kumari

W/o Sh. Om Prakash Poddar




Barauni Refinery, P.S. Barauni,

Distt. Begusarai, Bihar. ……………Respondent

Date of Institution: 25.10.2010

Reserved for Judgment on: 07.12.2011

Date of Judgment: 16.12.2011

JUDGMENT

1. This petition is filed on behalf of Om Prakash

Poddar, whereby the petitioner seeks

dissolution of his marriage with the

respondent U/s 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter in short

referred to as “the Act”)

2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner

married with the respondent on 24.06.2004 at

Katihar, Bihar according to Hindu Rites and

Ceremonies and one female child was born out

of the said wedlock.

3. It is averred by the petitioner that his

marriage with the respondent was solemnized

fraudulently and forcibly, under life threat

given by the respondent’s family members.

4. It is further averred that since the very

first day of the marriage, the petitioner

protested publically against the marriage but,

due to persistent threats and pressure by the

respondent’s family the petitioner could not

do anything and to bear with the consequences.

5. It is also averred that the respondent lived

forcibly in the marital accord with the

petitioner and the petitioner had to remain

silent because of his ailing parents.

6. It is further averred that when the father of

the petitioner was on his death bed the

respondent left the matrimonial home with her

father on 15.08.2005 and never returned back.

7. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner and

carefully gone through the records of the

case. It is submitted on behalf of the

petitioner that the petitioner has proved his

case and further prays that the marriage

between the petitioner and the respondent be

dissolved.

8. Recapitulation of sequence of events are as

under:

The petitioner has filed the present case

on 25.10.2010.

Respondent appeared once and thereafter chose not

to appear in the matter and was proceeded Ex-parte

on 06.06.2011.

9. Ex-parte evidence was led by the petitioner on

09.09.2011 and closed his evidence on

17.11.2011. In his evidence the petitioner has

examined four witnesses including himself, his

mother, sister and one friend.

10. In his statement the petitioner has stated

that he got married with the respondent on

24.06.2004 and one female child was born out

of their wedlock on 20.05.2005.

11. As regards ground of cruelty, the

petitioner has miserably failed to show even a

single incident of alleged cruelty caused by

the respondent against him.

12. The statement was mainly confined to the

point that his marriage was solemnized

fraudulently with the respondent against his

wishes in 2004 under pressure from certain

people and he had not accepted the marriage.

13. On the face of it, the aforesaid ground

taken by the petitioner has got no legs to

stand for the simple reason that he had

accepted her and got physically involved with

her and a female child was born on 20.05.2005,

which is within one year of the marriage.

14. This itself shows that the ground taken by

the petitioner is made up for the sake of

making out a case against the respondent. Had

he not accepted the marriage, he would not

have cohabited with her, more so if it was a

forced marriage. Moreover, this in itself is

not a ground of cruelty caused by the

respondent to the petitioner by any stretch of

imagination. Once the petitioner accepts the

marriage and the respondent, pursuant to which

he cohabits with her, the ground that the

respondent was not to his liking becomes a

baseless ground.

15. The remaining part of the evidence is

confined to the ill-health of the father of

the petitioner and a life threat given by the

family of the respondent to the petitioner.

16. Averments made in the petition finds no

place in affidavit filed by the petitioner in

his evidence and none of the averment

mentioned in the petition regarding cruelty

has been mentioned in Ex.PW1/A, in the

evidence.

17. The natural corollary is that the

averments made in the petition are false and

cannot be relied upon in order to assess if

any cruelty has been cased by the respondent

or not.

18. The statement of his mother, sister and

his friend are also identical and are confined

to the similar statement as given by the

petitioner in his evidence. Therefore,

statement of PW2 Smt. Asha Devi, PW3 Smt. Sneh

Lata and PW4 Sh. Digvijay Singh are also no

help to the case of the petitioner in this

regard.

19. Cumulatively speaking, no ground

whatsoever has been made out by the petitioner

in his entire evidence, including PW2, PW3 and

PW4 on the ground of cruelty allegedly caused

by the respondent, which may have endangered

his mental or physical health.

20. As regards ground of desertion, it is

stated by the petitioner that since 17.04.2005

the respondent is living separately from him

and it is also stated that since that day

there has been no cohabitation between them.

21. In this regard, the petitioner has also

placed on record a petition filed by the

respondent, which is Ex.PW1/3 in which she has

mentioned that since 17.04.2005 she has been

thrown out of her matrimonial home. Therefore,

both the parties states that since 17.04.2005,

there has been no relationship of husband and

wife between them.

22. Petitioner has also placed on record

photocopy of letters dated 20th June, 07

th

August and 10th January, 2008 sent to the

respondent for joining the matrimonial home,

but the respondent chose not to join the

petitioner in the matrimonial home.

23. The respondent, after appearing in the

matter chose not to appear and she even did

not file WS, which shows that she is not

interested in keeping any kind of relation

with the petitioner and it also appears that

she intends to bring the cohabitation

permanently to an end.

24. She has also not made any kind of effort

to join the matrimonial home at Delhi and she

is staying with her father in Bihar for the

last more than six years. No reasonable ground

or excuse has been coming from the side of the

respondent to show as to why she had decided

not to live with the petitioner in the

matrimonial home.

25. In the absence of any such reason, it

shall be construed that she had left the

matrimonial home without reasonable cause or

excuse to stay away from the petitioner. On

the other hand, it shall be taken that the

respondent is intending to bring the

matrimonial relationship to an end and she is

not at all interested in continuing any

relationship with the petitioner as husband

and wife.

26. It is therefore clear that the respondent

has deserted the petitioner for more than two

years immediately preceding the presentation

of the petition and she has severed all

matrimonial relationship with the petitioner.

27. Though, no specific ground of desertion

has been taken by the petitioner in the

petition, yet a ground of desertion has been

made out by the petitioner. However, in the

peculiar facts and circumstances of the

matter, a decree of Judicial Separation is

passed in favour of the petitioner and against

the respondent under the Provision of Section

10 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Decree Sheet be drawn accordingly.

File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open court

On 16.12.2011 (DEEPAK JAGOTRA)

JUDGE, FAMILY COURT

DWARKA, NEW DELHI

True Copy

ANNEXURE: P-10

Date: 07/02/2012

Ref: F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 dated 09/01/2012.

From:

Om Prakash Poddar

R/O RZF-893, Netaji Subhas Marg

Raj Nagar Part-2, Palam Colony,

New Delhi-10077

Mob: 9968337815

E-mail: [email protected]

To,

The Secretary,

Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee

Room No.33 to 38, Lawyers Chambers,

High Court of Delhi, New Delhi- 110003,

Sub: Undue delay in filing appeal and misleading

information furnished by the Advocate

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is with reference to the Divorce suit No.

700/2010 later renumbered as 678/2010 by the Family

Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi. I am the

petitioner, filed the divorce petition seeking

dissolution of marriage with the respondent U/s 13

(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on

25.10.2010 in Ms Deepa Sharma, Principal Judge,

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi, however, the

Judgment is being passed of Judicial Separation U/s

10 of Hindu Marriage Act.

Respondent fought (one and half year) proxy war

through Ms. Deepa Sharma, Principal Judge, Family

Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi. Respondent was Ex-

Parte, yet, she took the Judgment in favour of her.

It is a sheer case of Judicial Corruption and

muscle flexing. Principal Judge, Ms Deepa Sharma,

Family Court, Dwarka Court, New Delhi had stopped

the whole court proceedings on 30th May 2011 on the

date of filing of WS by the Respondent and had not

sit and chaired any of the cases, in turn, the

order sheet had been generated alleging the

petitioner for requesting for adjournment of the

court proceeding.

Consequently, I have approached the Delhi High

Court Legal Service Committee (DHCLSC) on 4th of

January, 2012 for filing an appeal. However, the

Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee (DHCLSC)

has provided me the Advocate Mr. Jai Bansal vide

letter No. F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 on 09/01/2012.

Now, the request for filing an appeal is pending

before DHCLSC since then. Even after my pursuance

with number of emails for one month, no action has

been taken so far.

In view of the above, I need information on the

following:

1. Why Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee

(DHCLSC) is not filing my appeal? The request

is pending with vide letter no.

F.No.3945/DHCLSC/2012 dated 09/01/2012. It is

pending since 4th of January, 2012.

2. Why the counsel provided by DHCLSC is not

willing to file my appeal as per the draft

finalized by me on 31st January, 2012.

3. Why the legal Aid counsel took my sign on

Vakalatnama and Affidavit with an assurance of

finalized draft on 31st January, 2012 at his

Supreme Court Chamber and changed his mind in

the next morning. (Email of communication with

Advocate attached)

4. Why Legal Aid Advocate, Mr. Jai Bansal, Chamber

No.105, New Lawyer’s Chamber, Supreme Court of

India, New Delhi has removed the facts and

justification for nexus of Judges with the

Respondent from the finalized draft of my Matt

Appeal without my consent?

5. Why Legal Aid Advocate is willing to conceal

the material facts to defend the acts of abuse

of court process by the Judges and to present

the distorted picture of my case before High

Court?

6. Why Legal Aid Advocate has furnished a false

Diary No.21996 on 3rd February, 2012 while no

case found by this diary no. in the website of

Delhi High court?

7. Why Legal Aid Advocate has furnished a false

email stating that the case is listed on 8th

February in the court of Justice Veena Birbal

i.e. court no. 25 of Delhi High Court for

arguments on notice to the other parties. While

as per the cause list (attached for 8th Feb) no

case is listed in my name.

8. Why I have been harassed unnecessarily?

Om Prakash Poddar

Enclosures sent through email:

1. Letter of Legal Aid by Delhi High Court Legal

Service Committee

2. Email of communication with Advocate attached

3. Cause list for 8th Feb, 2012.

True Copy



I.A.NO. OF 2012

IN

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.9854 OF 2012

IN THE MATER OF :


VERSUS

RINA KUMARI …RESPONDENT

APPLICATION FOR SEEKING PERMISSION TO

APPEAR AND ARGUE THE SPECIAL LEAVE

PETITION IN-PERSON

To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India

And His Companion Justices of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

THE HUMBLE APPLICATION OF THE

PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED

MOST RESPECFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Petitioner above named respectfully

submits this petition seeking special leave to

appeal against the interim impugned order dated

08.02.2012 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of

Delhi in MAT APPL NO. 7 of 2012.

2. That the Petitioner is well conversant with

the facts of the case.

3. That the petitioner is financially weak to

afford the lawyer.

PRAYER

It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

Court may be pleased to:

(a) Kindly permit the Petitioner to appear and

argue the Special Leave Petition in-person.

b) Pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble

Court may deem just and proper in the facts

and circumstances of the case.

DRAWN & FILED BY:


NEW DELHI:

FILED ON :02.03.2012.