- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3104 RPFC No. 100114 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100114 OF 2022 (-) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RASHMI W/O. RAJU .G, BEFORE MARRIAGE RASHMI D/O. KRISHNA BANDEKAR, AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O.KRISHNA BANDEKAR PLOT NO.5, ASHOK APARTMENT, 11TH CROSS, SAPTAPUR, DHARWAD TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD-580001. 2. KUMAR SHLOK S/O. RAJU .G AGE. 2 YEARS 4 MONTHS, (PETITIONER NO.2 IS MINOR SINCE REPRESENTED BY HIS MINOR GUARDIAN NEXT NATURAL MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1) …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. S. N BANAKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. RAJU.G S/O. GUNDANNA AGE.46 YEARS, OCC. PROFESSOR, R/O. KITTLE ARTS COLLEGE, DHARWAD-580008. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. V.G. BHAT AND SRI. S.M. KATAGI, ADVOCATES) ------- Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3104 RPFC No. 100114 of 2022 THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, 1984, PRAYING TO WHEREFORE THE PETITIONER MOST HUMBLY PRAY THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, DHARWAD IN CRIMINAL MISC. NO. 110/2019 DATED 16.04.2022 THEREBY DISMISSING THE MAINTENANCE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 125 OF CRL.P.C. MAY KINDLY BE SET ASIDE AND IN TURN CRL. MISC.NO.110/2019 MAY BE ALLOWED BY GRANTING MAINTENANCE TO THE PETITIONERS AS PRAYED THEREIN AND AWARDING COSTS AND LITIGATION EXPENSES TO THE PETITIONERS. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioners assailing the order dated 16.04.2022 in Crl.Misc.No110/2019 on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dharwad (for short the “Family Court”) dismissing the petition. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rank before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that the marriage between the petitioner No.1-wife and the respondent-husband was solemnized on 05.07.2017 at Dharwad and in their - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3104 RPFC No. 100114 of 2022 wedlock petitioner No.2 was born. It is further stated in the petition that the respondent-husband was not taking care of the needs of the petitioners and the respondent-husband was antagonized with the birth of the child and as such, the parties are residing separately. It is also forthcoming that the petitioner-wife has also lodged a complaint against the respondent-husband, however, no further action was taken against the respondent-husband as the elders of the family interfered and advised the parties to stay together. Thereafter also, there no change in the attitude of the respondent resulted on account of physical and mental torture made by the respondent on her and his family members, hence, the petitioners left the matrimonial home. 3.1. On service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed detailed objections. 3.2. The Trial Court after considering the material on record, dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner-wife has voluntarily deserted the house of the respondent-husband. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioners herein have filed this petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3104 RPFC No. 100114 of 2022 4. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that, the dismissal of the claim petition by the Family Court on the ground that the petitioners have voluntarily deserted the respondent, which is erroneous and liable to be set aside. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- husband sought to justify the impugned order. 7. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the marriage between the petitioner No.1-wife and the respondent- husband was solemnized on 05.07.2017 and in their wedlock petitioner No.2 was born. The finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the parties are residing separately. It is also forthcoming from the pleadings made by the petitioners herein that the petitioner No.1 is residing with her parents and in that view of the matter, taking into account the fact that the petitioner No.1 is not having any source of income and is separated by the respondent-husband, the Family Court has - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3104 RPFC No. 100114 of 2022 committed an error in dismissing the petition on the ground that the petitioners have left the matrimonial home voluntarily. It is to be noted that in the event if the Family Court has arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner No.1-wife has left the matrimonial home, however the reason for leaving the matrimonial home has to be considered in the light of the pleadings of the parties, before rejecting the claim petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. In that view of the matter, I find force in the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners herein. It is a fit case to remand the matter to the Family Court for fresh adjudication in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha and another1 and in the case of Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena & Others2. In that view of the matter, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The order dated 16.04.2022 in Crl.Misc.No.110/2019 passed by the Principal 1 (2021) 2 SCC 324 2 (2015) 6 SCC 353 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3104 RPFC No. 100114 of 2022 Judge, Family Court, Dharwad is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration by the Family Court. iii) In the light of the observation made above, in order to avoid further delay in the matter, the parties are directed to appear before the Family Court on 17.03.2025. iv) On their appearance, the Family Court is directed to dispose of the petition at the earliest. v) In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed off accordingly. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE YAN CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42