JUDGMENT :

1. In this Revision Application, the petitioners being the aggrieved persons in I.C.C. No. 12 of 2011 before the leaned J.M.F.C. Jaipatna assail the judgment dated 06.12.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dharmagarh in Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2012 reversing the findings given by the learned J.M.F.C. in the aforesaid complaint case.

2. The aggrieved persons filed an application before the learned J.M.F.C. Jaipatna inter alia alleging that in the year 2007 she and respondent No.1, present opposite party No.1, got married as per the Hindu rites and customs. They led a happy conjugal life for a period of one year and out of the wedlock, a girl child was born on 22.03.2008 and her name is Tamana. After delivery of the child, the aggrieved persons stayed in the paternal house at Jaipatna for five months and then returned to her in laws house at Kalampur. She found illicit relationship between the respondent No.1, i.e. her husband with respondent No.5, her sister-in-law. The aggrieved person raised her objection to such relationship and made a complaint before her father-in-law and mother-in-law. On such event, all the opposite parties became united and assaulted the aggrieved person and also demanded dowry. Regarding the demand of dowry made by the respondents, the aggrieved person has already lodged an FIR before the Jaipatna Police Station, for which P.S. Case No. 139 of 2011 corresponding to C.T. Case No. 267 of 2011 in the file of the J.M.F.C. Jaipatna was initiated. The aggrieved person after sustaining physical and mental torture stayed in her in-laws house till 03.03.2011. When the parents of the aggrieved person invited her to attend the marriage of her brother, she came back to her parental home at Jaipatna. Thereafter respondents did not allow her to enter their house and she was compelled to stay along with her child in her parental home at Jaipatna since 03.03.2011.

3. The respondents appeared and file their show-cause. They admitted that Tamana Mohanty was born on 22.03.2008 out of the wedlock between the aggrieved person and Respondent No.1. They pleaded that the aggrieved person was never interested to stay in her matrimonial home and she used to stay twenty-five days in every month in her parental house. The aggrieved person asked the respondent No.1 to leave his home and stayed with her in her parental house and the respondent No.1 denied the proposal. The aggrieved person came back to her parental house and stayed there until her husband brought her back to his house. In the month of March, 2011, one day in absence of the respondent No.1, the aggrieved person has left her in-laws house and came back to her parental house along with her daughter and she filed a case against he family members of her husband at Jaipatna Police Station. The respondents also denied the existence of any illicit relationship between her husband and her sister-in-law, demand of dowry and also any torture either physical or mental to the aggrieved person.

4. After leading evidence from both the sides, arguments were heard and the learned J.M.F.C. Jaipatna allowed the petition on contest and prohibited the respondents from alienating any assets including the Stridhana of the aggrieved person. The respondent No.1 was directed to provide accommodation for the aggrieved person and her daughter or to pay monthly rent of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) for the same. He was further directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees two thousand five hundred) for maintenance of the aggrieved person as well as her daughter. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 were directed to pay Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) as compensation to the aggrieved person.

5. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Jaipatna, the Respondents filed an appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dharmagarh, which was numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2012. After hearing the parties and on examining the do