RAJKUMARI SURYAVANSHI Vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR SURYAVANSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision is directed against the order dated 24.1.2017 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Janjgir, District JanjgirChampa in M.Cr.C. No.52 of 2016, whereby the Family Court has rejected the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. filed by the Applicant on the ground that she is residing separately without any sufficient and reasonable cause.

(2.) It was pleaded by the Applicant that her marriage with the Respondent was solemnised according to Hindu rites and rituals on 13.5.2011. 1-2 days after the marriage, the Respondent started doubting on her character and also started committing marpeet with her. The Respondent and his family members were saying that she has brought lesser dowry and they were demanding a sum of Rupees Two Lakhs from her and were harassing her mentally therefor. It was further pleaded that in April, 2012, the Respondent and his family members, after committing marpeet with her, expelled her out of her matrimonial house and since then she is residing separately at her paternal house. She is unable to maintain herself. The Respondent earns Rs.20,000/- per month. He also owns 10 acres of agricultural land.

(3.) In reply, the Respondent denied the allegations levelled upon him and pleaded that the Applicant herself did not like him and wanted to live separately from him. For this reason, she used to neglect him. They never demanded any dowry. It was further pleaded by him that the mother and grand mother of the Applicant by telling that they were taking the Applicant for few days took her with them, but thereafter, the Applicant did not return to her matrimonial house. The Respondent and his family members went to take the Applicant back many times, but she did not return. They also called social meetings, but she did not attend those meetings and did not return to her matrimonial house. He preferred an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rites, which was allowed in his favour. Despite that, she did not return. Thus, it is clear that she is residing separately from him without any reasonable cause. Therefore, she is not entitled to get any maintenance from him.