MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, J.

1. This appeal is directed against impugned judgment and decree dated 26.07.2014 passed by Family Court, Rajnandgaon in civil suit No.38-A of 2012, by which, the respondent's application for grant of decree of divorce on the ground of both desertion and cruelty have been allowed and decree granted.

2. Respondent filed an application under Section 13(1)(a)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for grant of decree of divorce both on the grounds of desertion and cruelty, on the pleadings inter alia, that the husband/applicant was married to non-applicant wife on 05.05.2005 and they were blessed with a son on 26.11.2006. The wife left for her matrimonial house on 26.08.2007 along with her brother. But thereafter, she did not return, though several efforts were made and since then she has completely deserted the applicant without any reasonable cause.

3. The applicant/husband also pleaded that the non-applicant wife subjected the applicant and his parents to physical and mental cruelty both. It was pleaded that wife made false allegations of commission of offence under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of the Chhattisgarh Tonahi Pratadna Nivaran Act, 2005. The parents of the applicant were arrested and due to this false accusation leading to arrest and criminal case, the applicant and his family suffered severe mental agony. The learned trial Court vide judgment dated 13.02.2012 vide Ex.P-11, acquitted the applicant and his family members finding that the allegation are not made out. In this manner, the non-applicant wife subjected the applicant to severe physical and mental cruelty. On such pleading decree was sought.

4. The non-applicant/wife came out with the pleading that after she had gone to her parental house in the year 2007, nobody including her husband came to take her back to her matrimonial house, though, efforts were made. It was also pleaded that she was subjected to cruelty and was branded as Tonahi. Therefore, she is justified in living separately.

5. The learned trial Court after recording the evidence and taking on record the documentary evidence found that the wife had deserted the husband without any reasonable cause and also that the husband was subjected to mental cruelty. This led to grant of decree of divorce.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant argues that the learned Family Court has granted decree of divorce on the ground of desertion without proper appreciation of evidence on record. It is submitted that the evidence led before the Court is that after she went to her parental house to celebrate Rakshabhandan Festival, the husband never came to take her back to matrimonial house. Therefore, the husband cannot complain of desertion. It is next submitted that the Family Court also did not appreciate the oral, documentary evidence led by the wife which proved that she was subjected to cruelty by treating her as Tonahi and was also subjected to demand of dowry and harassed. Because of such cruelty for two different reasons, she was justified and had a reasonable cause in living separately and it was for the applicant/husband to build confidence, lend assurance and take her back to the matrimonial life which was never done.

7. On the aspect of cruelty, it is argued that merely because the husband and his family members were acquitted in the criminal case by giving benefit of doubt, it cannot be treated as proof of falsity of allegation made by the wife. Otherwise also, it is argued before the Family Court that clinching and reliable evidence was led to prove cruelty by the husband and his family by branding the wife as Tonahi i.e. (one who plays witchcraft). Therefore, the allegation of husband having been subjected to cruelty is highly improbable.

8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent in support of the judgment decree, submits that the learned Family Court has granted decree of divorce on the ground of desertion taking into consideration that since the