fkaSnloantkn)

DISTRICT - NORTH 24 PARGANAS.

IN THE COURT OF LD. 2nd J.M. AT BARASAT.

Ref: M. Case No. 281/2020

Labani Karmakar (Sarkar)

...Petitioner.
- Vs -

Sangramjit Sarkar,
NOTARY PUBLIC
BEFORE THE
24 PARGANAS (NORTH)
.0.P.

Affidavit in chief on behalf of above named petitioner namely

Labani Karmakar (Sarkar).
I, Labani Karmakar (Sarkar), wife of Sangramjit Sarkar,
daughter of Dipak Karmakar, residing at 77 R.B.C. Road,
Milanpally, Prasadpur, P.0. & P.S. - Barasat, District- North
24 Parganas, Pin - 700124, by faith -Hindu, by Occupation -
2 6MAR
Hosewife, by Nationality - Indian, do hereby solemnly affirm
and declare as follows :

1 That I am the petitioner of this Case and well conversant

about all facts and circumstances of the Case.

KUM
AAR

That the petitioner herein is the legal married wife of the

party herein and the marriage between the

parties solemnized on 29/06/2018 in accordance with

Special Marriage Act. 1954 at Barasat P. S. Barasat,
 District North 24 Parganas before the marriage registrar
Sri Subhash Chandra Dey within jurisdiction of this Id.

court and thereafter a ceremonial function held on

18/07/2018 organized by the petitioner's side at their
cost at Akshay Palace, at Rabindra Nagar, Siliguri,
District- Darjeeling and also reception program held on
20/7/2018 at "Swapnanil Bhawan," Siliguri, Darjeeling
in presence of relations friends of both the parties and
the petitioner was brought to her Matrimonial home at

the address mentioned in the cause title of this present

opposite party and started to live together as husband

and wife in that said night just after closing ceremony on

20/07/2018 Mother-in-law with assistance of sister-in

law seized all the gold ornaments from the petitioner and

kept all gold ornaments in their custody in that said

2 6M A R
2025
marriage occasion as per demand of the opposite party a
number of gold ornaments (about 12 bhari), utensil,

clothing etc. were given and all the gifted gold ornaments

KAR
,AS,Hn marriage ceremony including said ornaments of 12
Ce twi7brai totally about 28-30 bhari approx. gold ornaments
eyt entrusted upon the opposite party by the petitioner
soon after their marriage. But father of the petitioner
expressed his inability to pay dowry money as per
 3

demand of the opposite party before settlement of the

said marriage and accordingly marriage was finalized

Matrimony
based on the advertisemnent through Bharat
opposite
under profile ID No. 82089913 in name of the
was born during their
party. Be it noted that no child

wedlock.

knowledge.
This is true to the best of my

negotiation one and was finalized

3. That this marriage was
opposite party (|D No.
based on the name of profile of

advertised by him in Bharat Matrimony

82089913)

profile the opposite

portal. It should be noted here in his

party declared himself as "Graduate and job status as

non-graduate
"Technician" knowingly qualification as one
Eastern Railway at
and job status is/was only "Helper" of
in profile
the material point of time with the declaration
2 6M A R
2025

herein dishonestly
"Caste no bar. The opposite party

misbehaved the petitioner and her family by concealing

fide intention.
status of his job and qualification for mala
MOTAR Further be noted here the petitioner belong to
schedule

/caste andknowing, that theopposite party and his family

agreed and gave Consent to the marriage as
per his

declaration "Caste no bar" through Bharat Matrimony

 (sankan)
4

believing such declaration the marriage was

and
registered accordingly.

knowledge.
This is true to the best of my

marriage it was revealed that

the
4. That soon after the
opposite party misled
status as declared is false and the
opposite party was posted
the petitioner knowingly. The
at the time of marriage
in Malda under Eastern Railway
petitioner used to stay in the
and also stay there and the
sister-in
matrimnonial home with her mother-in-law and
matrimonial home,
months in
law. After passing few
in-law both jointly and/or
mother in law and sister-
addressing her in Bengali
severally started to. hate by
presence of outsiders and
"Nichu jater meya" even in
one maid servant in the
used to exploit the petitioner like
occasions sought to the
2 NAR
2 0 2 5

house. The petitioner on different

Malda for necessary
opposite party during his posting in
all were in vain.
0 assistance to protect herself but

lHowever, the opposite party sometime after

8 months of

mgriage was transferred to N.J.P. under

N.F. Railway
home.
and used to live with the petitioner in matrimonial
disputes
The petitioner tried to mitigate the prevailing
amongst the inmates with the help
of her husband
 (satkan
)

opposite party in order to maintain peace

and tranquillity

unfortunate to say, every time

of her matrimonial life but
annoyed and neglected
the opposite party has become
discharging his minimum obligation
to protect the
her in
degree of torture increased
petitioner. As a result of that
presence of the
day by day upon the petitioner in

opposite party directly took

opposite party and sometime
mentally
torture physically and
part with the inmates to
The opposite party made
both in different occasions.
bring the
tremendous pressure upon the petitioner to
to be
money of bike from her father proposed
price
and being refused by the
purchased by the opposite party
assaulted the petitioner
petitioner, opposite party
mother-in-law joining
physically. Moreover, sister-in-law,
make pressure upon the
with the opposite party used to
her father in different
2 bM A R2025 petitioner to bring money from
including husband of the
occasions. All the inmates

in Bengali
petitioner threatened once again uttering
jat, nichu haya
S, NO language as Chhotaloker Baccha, Nichu
under
thakbi. The petitioner has been passing the days
cast atrocity
Tyar and tremendous mental agony causing

perpetrated by the members of the family

in- law. Several

occasions the petitioner tried to raise

voice against such
 (Snan)
6

cast atrocity but every time the petitioner was seriously

assaulted. In a true sense, member in-laws including
husband treated the petitioner as merely one maid
servant and neglected her refusing proper, adequate
maintenance for her livelihood as one reputed lady. The
incident of physical torture On 10/06/2019 and
22/06/2010 by the opposite party upon the petitioner

has gone beyond tolerance of the petitioner while the

petitioner wan drunk and accordingly was compelled to

call local police to save her life. But police concern

declined to record complaint in written against opposite

party as the opposite party is backed by the ruling, party.

Under such compelling circumstances with fear of life,

the petitioner was forced to leave her matrimonial home

on 27/06/2019 and since then petitioner has been living

2 0 MAR2025 at her present address mentioned in cause title under

shelter of her retired father within jurisdiction of this ld,
Court.

This in true to the best of my knowledge,

5 oThat it wasfarther revealed that the opposite party being,

one employer of Railway with some ill motive did not
registered the name of the legal married wife of the
 7

opposite party in the family declaration form as per norm

months of
of government schedule even after passing 13
party not
his marriage. As a result of that, the opposite
the petitioner
only denied the petitioner wife but deprived
others causing
in availing medical benefit including

suffering and injury to the petitioner.

In such situation

personal intervention of the

the petitioner sought for
proper
DRM, Kathihar under N.F. Railway to take
regarding this matter. Ultimately,
the
step/arrangement

opposite party to
said officer Mr. R.KVarma compelled the
register the name of the petitioner
as legal maried wife of

declaration form as per

the opposite party in the family
schedule in presence of the
norms of the government

petitioner and other employees.

Further it should be

pertinent to mentioned here upon request of the

convince the
o M A R
L D e t i t i o n e r

the said officer tried utmost to

peacefully
opposite party to settle the matter in dispute
of the said
but the opposite party did not obey the advice

officer and accordingly the opposite party did not take

Back the petitioner giving undertaking following the

advice of the said officer.

This is true to the best of my knowledge.

 8

6. That the petitioner, however, was compelled to lodge

F.LR. before Barasat P.S. and criminal case started being

no. Barasat P.S. Case No. 114/ 19, dated 19/08/2019,

u/s. 498A/406/506/34 I.P.C. and in addition to that

another case being Barasat P.S. Case No. 165/19, dated

26/12/2019, u/s 4(r)(s) of Schedule Cast & Schedule

tribe (POA) Act based on additional complaint lodged by

the petitioner. Both are still pending before Barasat A. C.

J. M.

This is true to the best of my knowledge.

7. That in such situation the petitioner was compelled to

take shelter since 28/06/2019 under care of her father, a

retired person and has been passing the days with acute
hardship being neglected and refused by the opposite

2025
party with fear. The petitioner has become mentally upset
MAR

2D and physically ill causing such type of torture after

returning from matrimonial home and being cured the
,0S, OTAR
petitioner took necessary legal step against the opposite
Party including other inmates. The petitioner has no
Res.?i

fncome source of The opposite party did not pay any

single money towards maintenance till this day for which

the petitioner has been passing days in distress condition

 9

food, clothing,
without having, proper and adequate
according to the need of one
medical treatments etc.

schedule caste wife. Moreover

the
reputed and educated
the
bother to enquire about
opposite party did not
party
petitioner till this day. Thus, the opposite
the
deliberately did not discharge his obligation upon
and refused the petitioner
petitioner and being neglected
maintenance.
Court praying for
has come before this Id.

knowledge.
.This is true to the best of my

Opposite Party is an employee of Railway under

8 That the
than
Central Government drawing monthly salary more
salary
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only now the
D.A. and increments (various)
is increased and O.P. got
Government and his present
allowance from the Central

per month at the time of

salary is about Rs.65,000/-
II (AC) in post of N.J.P.
2 MAR
2025

filing the case 0.P. was Helper

as a Technician (AC)
under NF Railway now he is working
mother of Opposite Party
post of HRMS module. The
family pension month
\namely Ratna Sarkar also enjoying
O.P. namely Sonali Sarkar is
bymornth and elder sister of
North Bengal University
an earning member working in
own house. The Opposite
and all are residing at their
 10

Party has no other financial liabilities and/or obligation

at all.

This is truc to the best of my knowiedge

g. That the Petitioner filed the instant case praying for

maintenance amounting Rs. 25,000/- per month

from

filed petition
the Opposite Party at that time and also
litigation cost of Rs.
írom interim maintenance and

20,000/- (minimum) to contest the case.

knowledge.
This is true to the best of my

335/2019 J/s 9 of H.M. Act

10 That one Mat Suit being No.
A.D.J. at Siliguri and the
1995 was filed by O.P. before
Ld. 5th A.D.J. at Barasat as
case was transferred before
High Court in the Circuit
per Order of Hon 'ble Calcutta

Bench at Jalpaiguri but at the date

of hearing O.P. being
26NAR
2025
application
petitioner withdraw the said case with an

was filed supressing the

stating that he, That the case

material facts and only intend

to save his shelter and

such petition was harassing

and when the 5th A.D.J. was
her
passed order to retun
back to the Petitioner at
petitioner with draw
matrimonial home, the 0.P. being
petitioner as
willing to live with the
the case as he is not
husband and wife.
 (KfwamlnkarSmkan)
11

This is tråe to the best of my knowledge.

11. It is not a fact that the case of Petitioner is

not
maintainable as per law and facts of the case or the case
has no cause of action or the case is barred by principal

of estoppel, weaver and acquience or the case is filed for

harass the O.P. or some ill gain or Petitioner supressed
any fact before the Ld. Court.

This is true to the best of my knowledge.

12. It is not a fact that O.P. or his family members did not
made any demand or they have no knowledge about the

articles ornanents and stridhan properties of Petitioner

or Petitioner after taking her all belongings left her

matrinonial home in her own will or Petitioner created

any disturbance or chaos at the time of marriage or

2 MAR2 0 2 5 thereafter.

This is true to the best of my knowledge.

MAR ,S, It is not a fact that 0.P. disclosed all information

stegarding his education and qualification at the time of

A marriage or/they provided any love or support to the

Petitioner so that she could lead happy martial life or

Petitioner made any false or contacted statement to

 Xkanlemka(Skan
14

or O.P. filed case

restitution of conjugal right to return
back the petitioner. But it was
eyewash to the society and
Ld. Court.

This is true to the best of my knowledge.

15. That the following documents are filing by

the Petitioner
and your Honour may pleased to exhibit the same
in
favour Petitioner.

i) The registered marriage certificate of the parties dated -

29.06.2018 before Mr. Subhash Chandra Dey along with
Marriage Invitation Card.
iü) Marriage Advertisement through Bharat Matrimonial
Site of Mr. Sangramjit Sarkar, under Profile ID No.
B2089913.

iii) Cash Memo of Senco Gold & Diamond dated

16.01.2018 amounting Rs. 11,250.00
2 A R2 0 2 5

iv) Cash Memo of Pritam Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. dated -

05.05.2019 for the Rs.70,768.62.

RAAR Cash Memo dated 09.11.2015 of P.C. Chandra

,S, No v)
lewellers amount Rs. 11,853.00.
vij Railway Ticket dated - 27.06.2019 for return from
New Jalpaiguri to Sealdabh.
vi) Medical Certificate of Dr. P.B. Roy dated
29.06.2019.

viii) Prescription dated - 20.08.2019 of Barasat District

Hospital and onwards.
 kamtlr/sonkai)
17

16. That Ipray as per prayer of my case.

affidavit
That all the statements made in this
knowledge
in chief are true to the best of my
affidavit in chief at
and belief and Isign on this
27.03.2025.
Barasat Court premises on

taban kamuhan/Soankan)
Deponent
Identified by me

Advocate

!c'ury
(3)

Rajt.c:, ci 24 Pa

2025
MAR
26
CHECHEYBY
N O T A R Y
C L E R h