I.S. MEHTA, J.

1. Instant revision petition is preferred by the petitioner- Reema Salkan under Sections 397/401 Cr. P. C. read with Section 482 Cr. P. C. and Section 19 of the Family Court Act, 1984 against the impugned order dated 28. 01. 2015 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Courts North, Rohini, Delhi in Petition No. 363/14 Unique Case I.D. No. 02404R101992003 titled as Reema Salkan vs. Sumer Singh Salkan.

2. It is alleged in the maintenance petition dated 16.07.2002 that the petitioner got married with respondent no. 1 as per the Hindu rites and ceremonies on 24.03.2002 at Infantry Hostel, Delhi Cantonment, Delhi and the initial source of parties contact was on the basis of newspaper advertisement.

3. It is further alleged that at the time of rukka ceremonies it was disclosed that the respondent is the permanent resident of Canada and he would take the petitioner on 28. 03. 2002 to Canada on a tourist visa. The father of the respondent and his other family member assured the petitioner that they would arrange for the petitioner's visa and on 15. 03. 2002 the father of the respondent called the parents of the petitioner to Meerut and asked for Rs. 1 lakh (Rs. 55,000/- for petitioner's return ticket to Canada and Rs. 45,000/- for her subsequent immigration to Canada). They also demanded Rs. 1 lakh from the parents of the petitioner for household goods. Consequently, the parents of the petitioner gave Rs. 2 lakh to the respondent's family apart from other gifts.

4. The marriage of the petitioner and respondent no. 1 was solemnized on 24. 03. 2002 at the Radisson Hotel in Delhi. The petitioner remained at Meerut U. P. from 25. 06. 2002 till 14. 07. 2002 after the marriage the respondent's sister and mother-in-law started taunting the petitioner for bringing insufficient dowry and the mother-in-law took all the cash and gift items. On 28.03.2002, the sister of the respondent took all the stridhan which was given on marriage and her mother-in-law took all jewellery items with her. On 28.03.2002, the respondent No. 1 left the petitioner at the airport in Delhi, from where the brother and sister took her to parental home. On 12.06.2002, when the respondent submitted petitioner's immigration application in Canada, the petitioner informed the father of the respondent and other family members about her desire to return to Meerut and they told her that they would pick her up from Delhi on 25.06.2002 and her mother-in-law asked her to bring $500 along with her, which she told that the respondent had spent on lawyer in Canada for her immigration.

5. It is further stated that during the petitioner's visit to Meerut from 25.06.2002 till 14. 07. 2002, the behaviour of her mother-in-law was very abusive, quarrelsome and rude. She used to shout at the petitioner on trivial matters, and abused her and her parents, used to call them indecent and senseless. When the petitioner objected to use of abusive language by the mother-in-law and father-in-law, the sister-in-law caught hold of petitioner's hair and thrashed her. She kept instigating her mother to throw the petitioner out of the house and her mother-in-law often used to call the parents of petitioner' Kangla', who did not even gift a car. The petitioner felt very lonely and scared in such a hostile atmosphere.

6. It is further stated that on 14.07.2002, the mother-in-law of the petitioner took all her remaining stridhan sarees, jewellery and cosmetics and threatened her not to demand the same in future or she would be thrown out of the house. On the occasion of 'Teej', the mother-in-law of the petitioner demanded cash to be brought by her from her parents for Lancer car and also ordered to get gold chains for the respondent and his father, a gold set for herself, which she told must be heavier than the previous one. She told the petitioner to go back to Delhi