IN THE COURT OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE AT ULUBERIA,
HOWRAH
MATRIMONIAL SUIT NO. ________ OF 2026
(An
application under Section 27(1)(d), read with Sections 31 and 32, of the
Special Marriage Act, 1954)
|
In the matter of: |
|
|
Arun
Lal Chowdhury, son of Jahar Lal Chowdhury, aged about 38 years, by faith
Hindu, by occupation Assistant Teacher in a Government Primary School,
residing at Flat No. 4H, NCC Park, Tower-2, Burikhali, Bauria, District
Howrah, Pin - 711310, and having permanent address at East Burikhali, near
Bauria Girls' School, P.O. Burikhali, P.S. Bauria, District Howrah, Pin -
711310. |
...
Petitioner |
|
- Versus – |
|
|
Anjum
Jahan Ara, daughter of Md. Ghulam Jeelani Ansari, aged about 34 years, by
faith Muslim, residing at 59/A, Line no. 04, D-Block, Fort Gloster, P.O. Fort
Gloster, P.S. Bauria, District Howrah, Pin - 711310. |
... Respondent |
The humble petition
of the petitioner above named;
MOST
RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH;
1.
That
the petitioner is the legally married husband of the respondent. The parties
solemnized their marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 on 27 November
2021 before the Marriage Officer at Village Bahira, P.O. Bahira, District
Howrah. The marriage was entered in the Marriage Certificate Book under Certificate
No. WB3410020102010010258-2021-161254. The corresponding notice under Section 5
bore Serial No. 2021-161254 dated 22 October 2021.
2.
That,
after solemnization, the parties held a social reception on 8 December 2021 at
"Country Roads", Panchla, Howrah, opposite M.C.S. Hospital, in the
presence of members of both families. Thereafter, they commenced matrimonial
life at the petitioner's family residence at East Burikhali, Bauria, Howrah.
3.
That
one female child, namely Rani Chowdhury, was born from the wedlock on 17 June
2023 at Genesis Hospital, Kolkata. The child is presently stated to be in the
care and custody of the respondent. The petitioner has affection for the child,
has never abandoned his parental responsibility, and craves leave to seek appropriate
access, visitation and other orders in the child's welfare under Section 38 of
the Act, if necessary.
4.
That
the petitioner is employed as an Assistant Teacher under the District Primary
School Council, Howrah, and was posted at Manickpur Hindi Primary School under
Andul West Circle. The petitioner has at all material times endeavoured to
maintain the respondent and the minor child and to provide them with a secure
matrimonial home.
5.
That the respondent is a well-educated woman
possessing postgraduate and professional qualifications, namely M.A. and B.Ed.
She is qualified, competent and capable of taking suitable employment and
earning sufficient income for her own support. The petitioner does not
presently have access to authenticated particulars of her current employment or
actual income and, therefore, craves leave to place such particulars before
this Hon'ble Court if and when disclosed or ascertained. This statement is made
without prejudice to the welfare, maintenance and other lawful rights of the
minor child.
6.
That,
soon after the marriage, the respondent began behaving in a hostile, abusive
and humiliating manner towards the petitioner and his family members. She
frequently used intemperate and insulting language, picked quarrels over
ordinary domestic matters and sought to isolate the petitioner from his aged
parents. The petitioner initially endured such conduct silently in the hope
that normal marital relations would be restored.
7.
That
on or about 22 June 2022, during a domestic altercation, the respondent, in a
fit of rage, allegedly threw the petitioner’s helmet at the petitioner’s
mother, Late Malati Chowdhury, and further attempted to slap her in the
presence of the domestic maid, thereby causing humiliation, fear, and severe
mental agony to the petitioner and his mother. The incident caused acute humiliation
and apprehension within the family. The petitioner nevertheless attempted
reconciliation and refrained from precipitating litigation.
8.
That
in or about October 2022, during pregnancy, the respondent went to her parental
home. The petitioner and his family extended cooperation and support during the
pregnancy and childbirth. After the child was born on 17 June 2023, the
respondent returned to the matrimonial home in or about December 2023; however,
the abusive and quarrelsome conduct resumed and the atmosphere of the household
became increasingly tense.
9.
That
it is pertinent to state that the petitioner’s mother, Late Malati Chowdhury,
was subjected to continuous humiliation, mental distress, and emotional agony
on account of the respondent’s conduct, which adversely affected her already
deteriorating cardiac condition. Owing to her recurring health complications,
she was required to be admitted to and treated at Christian Medical College, Vellore,
on several occasions. The extent of her fear and helplessness is evident from a
WhatsApp message sent by her to the petitioner on 26 March 2024 at about 10:20
a.m., wherein she stated in Bengali, “Amake O Bachte Debe Naa” (“She will not
allow me to live either”). The said communication reflects the severe
apprehension, mental trauma, and emotional suffering experienced by the
petitioner’s mother during her lifetime, which also caused immense anguish and
distress to the petitioner.
10. That the respondent
repeatedly obstructed normal interaction between the petitioner, the minor
child and the petitioner's parents. Whenever the petitioner and the child
attempted to visit the petitioner's parents, the respondent allegedly
threatened them, created scenes and caused disturbance. Such persistent conduct
deprived the petitioner of peace of mind and subjected him to sustained mental
cruelty.
11. That
the marriage between the parties was an inter-faith marriage consciously and
voluntarily solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. From the inception
of the marriage, the petitioner and his family respected the respondent's
religious identity and freedom of conscience. The respondent was permitted to
follow Islam and to perform her prayers, observances and other religious
rituals at the matrimonial home freely, peacefully and without obstruction,
objection, hesitation or interference from the petitioner or any member of his
family. It
is further stated that the respondent insisted upon retaining and continuing to
use her pre-marital name, bearing an expression of her Muslim identity, even
after the solemnization of her marriage with the petitioner.
12. That,
notwithstanding the tolerance and accommodation extended to her, the respondent
repeatedly attempted to persuade, pressurize and compel the petitioner to
renounce Hinduism and convert to Islam. The petitioner respectfully declined
because his religious faith is a matter of personal conscience and voluntary
choice. The respondent allegedly persisted with such demands on several
occasions, linked the continuation of peaceful matrimonial life with the
petitioner's conversion, and raised quarrels whenever the petitioner refused.
Such repeated pressure caused the petitioner serious anxiety, humiliation and
apprehension that his freedom of conscience and religious identity were not
being respected within the marriage. It is further stated that on 31 July
2021, the respondent, accompanied by her elder brother, allegedly took the
petitioner to Tipu Sultan Masjid, Kolkata, and attempted to persuade and compel
him to convert his religion against his free will and personal religious
beliefs.
13. That
the respondent also, on several occasions, attempted to obstruct the petitioner
and his family members from performing Hindu puja, festivals, customary
observances and other religious rituals at the matrimonial home. She allegedly
interrupted such observances, raised quarrels on different pretexts and
converted petty domestic issues into disputes at or around the time of religious
ceremonies. The petitioner submits that his grievance is not against the
respondent's faith or her lawful religious practice, which was always
respected, but against the alleged coercive demand for his conversion and the
discriminatory obstruction of his and his family's peaceful religious
observances. The repeated conduct aggravated domestic discord and caused the
petitioner sustained mental cruelty.
14. That, in a bona fide
effort to preserve the marriage and reduce conflict, the petitioner purchased
residential accommodation at Flat No. 4H, NCC Park, Tower-2, Burikhali, Bauria,
Howrah. The petitioner shifted to the said flat with the respondent and the
minor child on or about 2 February 2026.
15. That the
petitioner states that the aforesaid residential flat was not purchased out of
surplus funds or by way of any gratuitous acquisition. For acquiring the said
property and providing a separate, peaceful and secure matrimonial residence
for the respondent and the minor child, the petitioner obtained a substantial
housing loan from State Bank of India and incurred a continuing financial
liability. The petitioner is regularly repaying the said housing loan by
payment of the prescribed Equated Monthly Instalments (EMIs) every month from
his lawful income. Despite the matrimonial discord, separation of the parties,
maintenance of the minor child and other unavoidable personal and legal
expenses, the petitioner has diligently continued to discharge the loan
liability and has not committed any default in payment of the monthly
instalments. It is further stated that neither the petitioner nor any member of
his family demanded, accepted, or received even a single penny, whether as
dowry, gift, consideration, or otherwise, from the respondent or any member of
her family, either before, at the time of, or after the solemnization of the
marriage.
16. The petitioner
further states that the purchase of the said flat was a bona fide and
substantial financial commitment undertaken principally to preserve the
marriage, reduce interference and domestic conflict, and provide the respondent
and the minor child with an independent and stable matrimonial home. The
petitioner arranged the necessary margin money, completed the registration and
other formalities, and assumed the long-term obligation of repaying the housing
loan solely in the genuine expectation that the parties would reside together
peacefully as husband and wife and raise their minor child in a secure domestic
environment.
17. The petitioner
continues to remain personally liable to the lending bank for repayment of the
outstanding loan amount together with interest and other applicable charges. A
considerable portion of his monthly income is necessarily appropriated towards
payment of the EMI, thereby substantially reducing his disposable income. The
said recurring financial obligation constitutes a material and unavoidable
liability which deserves to be taken into consideration while assessing the
petitioner’s financial capacity and determining any claim for maintenance,
litigation expenses or other monetary relief.
18. The petitioner
submits that his uninterrupted repayment of the housing loan, without
committing any default, demonstrates his financial discipline, bona fides and
sincere commitment towards securing residential stability for the family.
However, notwithstanding the petitioner’s substantial financial sacrifice and
continuing repayment liability, the respondent failed to appreciate or
reciprocate his efforts, and the acts of cruelty, quarrels, intimidation and
matrimonial discord continued even after the parties shifted to the newly
purchased flat. Consequently, the very purpose for which the petitioner had
undertaken the substantial housing-loan liability and purchased the separate
residence stood frustrated by the conduct of the respondent.
19. That after
acquiring the aforesaid flat by availing a housing loan, the Petitioner further
obtained a personal loan for carrying out the necessary interior decoration, furnishing,
and improvement thereof, solely with the bona fide intention of creating a
comfortable and better living space for his family comprising himself, the
Respondent, and their only minor daughter. Consequently, the Petitioner remains
under a substantial and continuing financial obligation to repay both the
housing loan obtained for purchasing the said flat and the personal loan from
State Bank of India, availed for its interior decoration, besides meeting the
regular expenses and responsibilities of the family. The Petitioner willingly
assumed the entire financial burden in the sincere hope of securing a peaceful,
stable, and harmonious matrimonial life. However, owing to the conduct,
actions, and attitude of the Respondent, allegedly encouraged and supported by
her family members, all such efforts, sacrifices, and financial commitments of
the Petitioner proved futile, and the matrimonial relationship gradually
deteriorated beyond repair. The sacred bond of marriage thereby became
irretrievably strained, embittered, and deprived of the mutual trust,
affection, respect, and companionship necessary for its meaningful
continuation.
20. That the
respondent repeatedly prevented and restricted the petitioner and the minor
daughter from meeting, maintaining contact with, or spending time with the
petitioner’s parents, thereby depriving the minor child of the love, affection,
care, and companionship of her paternal grandparents. Whenever the petitioner
attempted to visit his parents or take the minor daughter to meet them, the
respondent allegedly created disturbances and scenes of confrontation. On
several occasions, she came to the residence and housing society of the
petitioner’s parents, shouted in a loud and aggressive manner, used abusive and
insulting language, and publicly humiliated the petitioner and his parents in
the presence of neighbours, residents, domestic staff, and other persons. Such
repeated conduct caused serious embarrassment, loss of dignity, mental agony,
and social humiliation to the petitioner and his elderly parents and further
disturbed the peace and harmony of the matrimonial relationship.
21. That, for the safety
of the family and the flat, the petitioner installed only one CP Plus Wi-Fi
CCTV camera in the hall room on 1 June 2026. The camera was directed towards
the entrance and common-floor area. On 2 June 2026, the respondent removed the
said CCTV camera and allegedly took away or discarded it along with the
Vodafone SIM card and micro-SD card installed therein. The petitioner recorded
the incident by a written complaint/G.D. application dated 3 June 2026 before
Bauria Police Station.
22. That on the night of
10 June 2026 at about 10:30 p.m., a grave incident occurred at the said flat
and Panchanantala More at Bauria Station Road. The respondent, allegedly acting
with her relatives, assaulted the petitioner with hands, fists, kicks and
slaps. It is further alleged that the respondent pressed/gripped the
petitioner's throat and attempted to strangulate him, causing bodily injuries
and a genuine apprehension for his life. Local persons intervened and rescued
the petitioner, after which he obtained medical treatment at Fort Gloster State
General Hospital, Bauria.
23. That the petitioner
lodged a written complaint on 12 June 2026, on the basis of which Bauria Police
Station Case No. 113 of 2026 dated 12 June 2026 was registered. The petitioner
was also called upon by the Investigating Officer to cooperate with the
investigation and produce relevant medical papers and evidence. The said
criminal proceeding is pending and is disclosed herein without inviting this
Hon'ble Court to determine criminal liability.
24. That the petitioner's
mother, Late Malati Chowdhury, separately submitted a written complaint dated
21 June 2026 before Bauria Police Station narrating the continuing abusive
conduct, threats to the family and the assault upon the petitioner. Her
complaint also records her serious cardiac condition and the severe distress
caused to her by the respondent's conduct. The petitioner's mother has since
died, as appears from the death certificate forming part of the petitioner's
records.
25. That owing to
the continuous cruelty, harassment, humiliation, and mental torture inflicted
by the Respondent upon the Petitioner and his family, the Petitioner’s mother
was subjected to unbearable emotional distress, anxiety, and suffering during
the final period of her life. The persistent matrimonial discord and the
Respondent’s conduct gravely affected her physical and mental health, causing
her condition to deteriorate prematurely. Ultimately, she passed away before
her natural time after enduring immense pain and anguish. The Petitioner
reasonably believes that the severe stress and trauma arising from the
Respondent’s acts and conduct materially contributed to the worsening of his
mother’s health and her untimely demise, leaving the Petitioner with
irreparable grief and a permanent sense of loss.
26. It is further
stated that the respondent repeatedly restricted and prevented the petitioner
and the minor daughter from visiting or maintaining regular contact with the
petitioner’s parents, thereby depriving the petitioner of the companionship of
his parents and the minor child of the love, affection, care, and association
of her paternal grandparents.
27. That after the
petitioner approached the police, the respondent and her relatives threatened
the petitioner and his family with false criminal cases and demanded withdrawal
of the petitioner's complaint.
28. That following the
aforesaid incident the respondent withdrew from the company of the petitioner
and has been residing at her parental address at Fort Gloster together with the
minor child since approximately 11th June 2026. There has been no
normal marital cohabitation thereafter.
29. That the minor
female child, namely Rani Chowdhury, was admitted to AMRI Hospitals,
Mukundapur, Kolkata, on 16 December 2023 and remained under medical care and
treatment there until her discharge on 18 December 2023. The petitioner duly
arranged for the child’s hospitalization and treatment and paid and/or borne
the necessary medical expenses, including the costs of admission, consultation,
medicines, diagnostic tests, and other incidental charges, thereby discharging
his parental responsibilities and ensuring the minor child received timely and
proper medical care.
30. That on 3
March 2026, the respondent allegedly prevented and restricted the petitioner
and the minor daughter from visiting the petitioner’s parental home and celebrating
Holi with the petitioner’s parents and the child’s paternal grandparents. On
the other hand, during the year 2026, the respondent took the minor daughter to
her own parental home for the celebration of Eid and Bakrid with her parents
and relatives. Such unequal and discriminatory conduct deprived the petitioner
and his parents of the opportunity to celebrate their religious and family
occasions with the minor child, while the respondent continued to permit the
child’s participation in festivals observed by her own parental family, thereby
causing emotional distress and a sense of exclusion to the petitioner and his
elderly parents.
31. That at a much
later stage, the petitioner came to learn that the respondent had allegedly
contracted an earlier marriage with one Tabrej Alam in or about the year 2012
at Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. The respondent had never disclosed the fact of the
said previous marriage to the petitioner or his family either before or at the
time of the solemnization of the present marriage. The alleged prior marriage
and its legal status were material facts directly bearing upon the respondent’s
marital status and capacity to contract the present marriage. The petitioner
states that the alleged concealment of such vital information deprived him of
the opportunity to make a free and informed decision concerning the marriage
and caused him profound shock, mental agony, and a complete loss of trust upon
subsequently learning of the same.
32. That
notwithstanding the separation between the parties and the pendency of disputes
and criminal proceedings, the petitioner has never neglected, abandoned or
sought to evade his parental duties and responsibilities towards the minor
female child born from the wedlock. Acting voluntarily, bona fide and solely to
secure the welfare, maintenance and day-to-day requirements of the minor child,
the petitioner remitted a sum of ₹5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand only) to the respondent through Electronic Money Order on
22 June 2026 and thereafter remitted a further sum of ₹5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) through
Electronic Money Order on 23 July 2026, and consequently a further sum of ₹5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) through
Electronic Money Order on 24 August 2026. The said amounts were specifically
intended for the maintenance, care, nourishment, education, medical needs and
other necessary expenses of the minor child, who is presently stated to be
residing with and under the care and custody of the respondent.
33. The aforesaid
voluntary remittances clearly demonstrate the petitioner’s continuing affection
for the minor child, his genuine concern for her welfare and his willingness to
discharge his lawful parental obligations despite the strained matrimonial
relationship and pending litigation between the parties. The payments were made
without any demand, direction or coercive order of any court or authority and
shall not be construed as an admission of any allegation, liability or claim
made or that may be made by the respondent against the petitioner. The said
remittances are entirely without prejudice to the petitioner’s rights and
contentions in the present proceeding and in all other connected proceedings,
including his right to seek appropriate custody, access and visitation
arrangements concerning the minor child in accordance with law and her
paramount welfare.
34. That the respondent's
cumulative conduct, including persistent verbal abuse and humiliation,
aggression towards the petitioner's mother, interference with the petitioner's
relationship with his child and parents, removal of the security camera and
storage media, the alleged physical assault and strangulation attempt of 10
June 2026, repeated threats, and the institution of an allegedly retaliatory
criminal case, has caused the petitioner grave mental agony, fear, humiliation
and loss of trust. The petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to continue
matrimonial life with the respondent.
35. That the acts
complained of are not isolated wear and tear of married life but constitute a
sustained course of physical and mental cruelty within the meaning of Section
27(1)(d) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The matrimonial bond has broken
down in substance due to the respondent's conduct, and continuance of the legal
tie would perpetuate hardship and injustice to the petitioner.
36. That the petitioner
has not condoned the acts of cruelty pleaded herein. His attempts at
reconciliation, provision of a separate residence and voluntary remittances
were made in good faith to preserve the marriage and support the child and
cannot be construed as condonation of the subsequent and continuing cruelty.
37. That there is no
collusion between the parties in presenting this petition. The petitioner has
not taken advantage of his own wrong and has approached this Hon'ble Court with
clean hands. The petition is presented after expiry of one year from the date
of marriage and is maintainable under Section 29 of the Act.
38. That the
aforesaid facts, grievances, and acts of cruelty, harassment, intimidation, and
unlawful conduct committed by the Respondent and the persons acting in concert
with her were duly and repeatedly brought to the notice of the police
authorities through several written complaints and General Diary Entries lodged
with the Bauria Police Station, District Howrah. In particular, the Petitioner
lodged a written complaint dated 3 June 2026, which was recorded as G.D. Entry
No. 118 dated 3 June 2026; thereafter, the Petitioner caused another complaint
to be recorded as G.D. Entry No. 428 dated 10 June 2026 and subsequently lodged
a further written complaint dated 12 June 2026, on the basis whereof Bauria
Police Station FIR No. 113 of 2026 dated 12 June 2026 came to be registered.
The Petitioner’s mother, Late Malati Chowdhury, also lodged a written complaint
concerning the aforesaid incidents and continuing acts of torture and
harassment, which was recorded as G.D. Entry No. 861 dated 21 June 2026. The
aforesaid contemporaneous complaints, General Diary Entries, and First
Information Report clearly demonstrate that the allegations made herein are
neither invented nor an afterthought but had been consistently reported to the
competent police authority at the relevant points of time.
39. That, save and except
Bauria Police Station Case Nos. 113 of 2026 and the related
investigation/proceedings disclosed above, no previous matrimonial proceeding
between the parties is known to the petitioner.
40. That this Hon'ble
Court has territorial jurisdiction under Section 31 of the Special Marriage
Act, 1954 because the parties last resided together within District Howrah at
Flat No. 4H, NCC Park, Tower-2, Burikhali, Bauria; the respondent presently
resides within District Howrah; and the marriage was solemnized within District
Howrah.
41. That,
following the aforesaid incident, the respondent voluntarily withdrew herself
from the society and company of the petitioner on 11th June 2026 and, together
with the minor female child, left the matrimonial home and began residing at
her parental home at Fort Gloster. Accordingly, 11th June 2026 constitutes the
date of separation between the parties, and since that date there has been no
resumption of normal matrimonial life or marital cohabitation between them.
42. That the cause of
action first arose soon after the marriage, thereafter on 22 June 2022, in
December 2023, following
the delivery of the minor child, the respondent returned to the matrimonial
home along with the newborn baby and resumed residing there with the petitioner
and the other members of his family. On 2 and 3 June 2026, on 10 and 12 June
2026, on 19 and 21 June 2026, and continues from day to day within the
jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.
43. That the requisite
court fee is paid herewith. The petition is bona fide and is filed in the
interest of justice.
In the circumstances
aforesaid, the petitioner most humbly prays that Your Honour may graciously be
pleased to;
a) pass
a decree of divorce under Section 27(1)(d) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954,
thereby dissolving the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the
respondent on 27 November 2021;
b) grant
the petitioner appropriate access and visitation with the minor daughter, Rani
Chowdhury, in such manner as this Hon'ble Court may consider consistent with
the welfare of the child under Section 38 of the Act, if such relief is pressed
by a separate/interlocutory application;
c) award
costs of the proceeding in favour of the petitioner; and
d) pass
such further or other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper.
And
for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.
VERIFICATION
I, Arun Lal Chowdhury, son of Jahar Lal
Chowdhury, aged about 38 years, residing at Flat No. 4H, NCC Park, Tower-2,
Burikhali, Bauria, District Howrah, Pin - 711310, the petitioner above named,
do hereby verify that the statements contained in paragraphs 1 to 22 and 26 to
28 are true to my knowledge and/or based on records in my possession; the
statements contained in paragraphs 23 to 25 and 29 are my respectful
submissions before this Hon'ble Court and are believed by me to be true; and
that I have not suppressed any material fact.
Verified
at Howrah on this ____ day of __________, 2026.
DEPONENT
Identified by me
Advocate
AFFIDAVIT
I,
Arun Lal Chowdhury, son of Jahar Lal Chowdhury, aged about 38 years, by faith
Hindu, by occupation Assistant Teacher, residing at Flat No. 4H, NCC Park,
Tower-2, Burikhali, Bauria, District Howrah, Pin - 711310, and having permanent
address at East Burikhali, near Bauria Girls' School, P.O. Burikhali, P.S.
Bauria, District Howrah, Pin – 711310, do hereby solemnly affirm and say as
follows;
1. I am the petitioner in the accompanying
matrimonial petition and am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of
the case.
2. The statements made
in paragraphs 1 to 22 and 26 to 28 of the accompanying petition are true to my
knowledge and/or based on records in my possession; the statements in
paragraphs 23 to 25 and 29 are submissions before this Hon'ble Court and
information believed by me to be true.
Solemnly
affirmed at Howrah on this ____ day of __________, 2026.
DEPONENT
Identified by me
Advocate
Notary
SCHEDULE OF DOCUMENTS / PROPOSED
ANNEXURES
|
Sl. No. |
Description |
Annexure |
|
1 |
Marriage
Certificate dated 27 November 2021 under Section 13 of the Special Marriage
Act, 1954. |
P-1 |
|
2 |
Birth
Certificate of minor daughter Rani Chowdhury. |
P-2 |
|
3 |
Appointment
letter of Arun Lal Chowdhury issued by the District Primary School Council, Howrah. |
P-3 |
|
4 |
Complaint/G.D.
application dated 3 June 2026, 10 June 2026, and 21 June 2026. |
P-4 |
|
5 |
Written
complaint dated 12 June 2026 and FIR in Bauria P.S. Case No. 113 of 2026. |
P-5 |
|
6 |
Injury/medical
papers issued by Fort Gloster State General Hospital, Bauria. |
P-6 |
|
7 |
Notice
issued by the Investigating Officer in connection with Bauria P.S. Case No.
113 of 2026. |
P-7 |
|
8 |
Written
complaint dated 21 June 2026 made by Late Malati Chowdhury. |
P-8 |
|
9 |
Electronic
Money Order receipts dated 22 June 2026, 23 July 2026 and 24 August 2026, for
Rs.5,000/- each. |
P-9 |
|
10 |
Death
Certificate of Late Malati Chowdhury. |
P-10 |
No comments:
Post a Comment