Short Note : 1. The husband filed an application under section 10 of the Act for judicial separation from his wife. The trial Court, on evidence, found that the appellant, husband, has failed to prove that the wife has deserted him, and that the husband has kept another lady as his wife, and dismissed the suit. Held: After hearing arguments and on going through the evidence and material placed on record, we are of opinion that there is no merit in this appeal which deserves to be dismissed on the short ground that there were justifiable grounds for the respondent to refuse to stay with the petitioner as his wife as the petitioner had treated her with cruelty during the time she lived with him as his wife. 2. Popat AW1, father of the petitioner, Laxman AW 2 and Heeralal AW 3 have admitted that the respondent had always complained about the ill-treatment and frequent 'maar-peet' meted out to her by her husband. The respondent, in her statement, which has not been challenged, has clearly stated that the petitioner often used to beat her and had created such a worst situation that ultimately he drove her out from the marital home when she was carrying and, thereafter never cared to look after her. She has no been cross-examined on this point. It appears that the relations between the parties were so strained that due to the constant 'maar-peet' the respondent was compelled to lodge a report against her husband at the police-station which fact has also not been disputed on behalf of the petitioner. 3. The evidence clearly indicate that the respondent, due to the conduct of the petitioner, had a reasonable apprehension that her living or co-habitation with the husband was not safe on account of the cruel treatment which she had received from him and, consequently, we do not find any ground to differ from the conclusion arrived at by the learned trial Judge on this question of cruelty. Appeal dismissed.