JUDGMENT K. KANNAN J. - The appeal is against the dismissal of the petition for divorce filed by the husband on the ground that the wife is guilty of cruelty and desertion. The husband had narrated several instances of cruelty, which had been denied by the wife. On the issue of desertion, the contention was that the wife had left the husband company in June, 1997 and that she had been living away without reasonable excuse. According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the trial Court was swayed by the fact that the wife had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and therefore, the allegation of divorce on the ground of desertion cannot stand. 2. The contention of the husband had been essentially on certain oral assertions and the instances of cruelty attributed by the husband on his wife were; (i) the wife had been insisting of setting up a separate house away from the parents of the house; (ii) the husband's paternal uncle Surender Singh had died in February, 1990 and at the time when the whole family was grieving, the wife had expressed that it would have been better if the husband's father himself had died in spite of his brother; (iii) the wife left the house abruptly in December, 1991 and when the petitioner along with one Chanan Singh, PW-4 went to the village Banwala Hawanta to bring her back, the wife abused and insulted the petitioner in the presence of Chanan Singh and said that she never considered the petitioner as a husband; (iv) she threatened that she will commit suicide by touching live electric wire when she was asked to do household chores; (v) during the festival of Baisakhi in 1997, the wife hurled utensils in the courtyard and abused the petitioner when he was sitting in the company of several relatives; (vi) she had given a false complaint under Section 406/498A IPC against the petitioner, his parents and brother that he was making demands of dowry nearly 9 months after the marriage which itself, according to the husband, was proof of the falsity of the complaint. 3. The trial Court had reasoned that if all the instances of cruelty had been genuine, the husband should have taken criminal case already against his wife. 3. The trial Court had reasoned that if all the instances of cruelty had been genuine, the husband should have taken criminal case already against his wife. The trial Court accepted a justification theory trotted out by the wife that the husband was pressurising the wife and her parents to give Rs.2 lacs for purchase of some property in Malout. The attempt of the appellant in appeal would be to show, therefore, that such a contention was also false, for she did not give any details of the property alleged to have been negotiated to be purchased by the husband. The counsel would argue that even the brother of the wife appearing as RW-3 stated that he was not aware that the petitioner had purchased any plot from any one and therefore, the contention that the wife and her parents were being compelled to give some amount for purchase of property could not be true. 4. The marriage has taken place on 28.11.1989 and there have been no issues to the parties although they have resided together for 8 years. It is an admitted case that wife was living away from June, 1997. The petition had been filed on 22.5.2001 and there have been large volume of oral evidence adduced by both parties in respect of their respective contentions. PW-2 Nirmaljit Singh had given evidence of his participation in Panchayat that took placed in July, 1997. He was a neighbour to the house of the husband. This evidence is not in any way helpful to either party except the fact that he had made an attempt along with other respectable in the village for bringing out the compromise between the parties. PW-3, Jaswant Singh, was the cousin of the petitioner, who stated that he had attended the wedding in the year 1989 and that he knew that the wife had left the company of the husband in the year 1997. While he had stated that he knew that the wife used to give frequent threats to commit suicide by touching live electric wire whenever the husband used to ask her to do household chores, he admitted in the cross-examination that none of such instances of threats ever took place in his presence. He spoke generally about the fact that she used to abuse her husband. He spoke generally about the fact that she used to abuse her husband. I do not find this evidence also is of any help to the petitioner any more than a fact that he had spoken about the general predisposition of the wife to be quarrelsome. PW-4, Chanan Singh said that he had seen the wife abuse her husband in his presence. Apart from a general allegation of abuse, I do not find this evidence was also of any help. 5. On the side of the respondent, RW-1 Narwair Singh, who was retired Principal of a college spoke about the fact that dowry had been demanded and secured by the husband and apart from marriage expenses that cost the wife's parents about Rs.4 lacs, cash of Rs.50,000/-had also been given to the petitioner for the purchase of motor cycle. He also spoke about the fact that he had participated in Panchayat in the year 1998 when they intervened to persuade the husband and her parents to drop the demand for Rs.2 lacs which the husband was asking for purchase of property in Malout. All the allegations against the husband were denied in the course of his cross-examination. One Jaspal Singh was examined as RW-2, who was also one of the panchayat members and spoke about the persistent demand of dowry by the husband and his parents and particularly about the demand for Rs.2 lacs for purchase of property . In the cross examination, it was elicited that no quarrel had taken place between the husband and wife in his presence and he had heard only about the same. He was also examined in a searching fashion, his evidence about the fact that there had been a Panchayat in the year 1998 by asking questions about the place, time and mention of the house etc. It was also elicited from him that he had no knowledge about the actual details of property, which was alleged as the property, which the husband was interested in purchasing. He admitted to the fact that the case under Dowry Act had been filed and pending at Fazilka. RW-3 Balraj Singh gave evidence about the demands of dowry and the fact that he had participated in a Panchayat held in the year 1998. He admitted to the fact that the case under Dowry Act had been filed and pending at Fazilka. RW-3 Balraj Singh gave evidence about the demands of dowry and the fact that he had participated in a Panchayat held in the year 1998. The evidence of RW4 Baltej Kaur is crucial, for she had given details of persistent demand for dowry and a denial that she had treated the husband with any act of cruelty. In the course of the cross-examination of RW-4, it was elicited that she had moved an application against the husband and all the members of his family when she had come away to her parent's house. Apart from the fact that she had filed a complaint to the police station, there is no evidence elicited or even a suggestion made that she had given a false complaint to the police and all the members are harassed. I do not have even the copy of the complaint what said to have been given to the police. Even in the chief-examination of the petitioner, nothing is averred as to the nature of complaint and how this was a false statement or evidence. In the course of the arguments, learned counsel argued that the criminal complaint which had been registered had ultimately been found to be false and all of them were acquitted. 6. In a case of allegations and counter-allegations, I do not find that there is any worthy material to act on to hold the claim of the husband that the wife was guilty of cruelty. If the parties have been living away from each other since the year 1997 that cannot by itself afford to the husband a plea for dissolution of marriage. No material grounds exist for grant of a divorce on such oral assertions. There are authorities to the effect that false complaint to the police and harassment of persons in the criminal court would itself amount to cruelty. As I have already observed that in the evidence, nothing was elicited about the alleged harassment. A resort to police for sorting out troubles in the family matters is not strange, for it is a general perception in villages that police with their authority will be able to secure conciliation between the parties and make meaningful interventions. As I have already observed that in the evidence, nothing was elicited about the alleged harassment. A resort to police for sorting out troubles in the family matters is not strange, for it is a general perception in villages that police with their authority will be able to secure conciliation between the parties and make meaningful interventions. This is no generalization to be applied in all cases but I am making this observation particularly in the light of absence of any specific details of the alleged complaint to the police and the ultimate outcome of acquittal alleged to have been delivered through a judgment of criminal court. 7. I do not find any substantial ground to take a view different from how the trial Court has considered the case. The decision is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed. The appellant shall continue to pay maintenance @Rs.2500/-per month till a meaningful solution is brought out between themselves that is mutually acceptable to them or any other change in circumstances exist either for enhancement or reduction.