On the facts stated, I would not advise withdrawing the RCR case merely because you are apprehensive that your wife may subsequently initiate criminal/DV proceedings. The better strategy depends on what your actual objective is now—whether you genuinely want restoration of the marriage or whether the RCR was filed only to demonstrate that you were willing to take her back.

Since your marriage is a Muslim marriage, the first point to verify is the legal basis under which your RCR proceeding has been filed. Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act is not applicable to Muslims. Muslim personal law is governed in matters of marriage and maintenance by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) framework. Courts do, however, recognise proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights in appropriate cases involving Muslim marriages.

Regarding the maintenance case dismissed in June 2026, there is no single answer to the question of when she can "re-appeal" without seeing the exact order and knowing the provision under which the case was filed. If it was a proceeding under the present Section 144 BNSS (earlier Section 125 CrPC), the order can potentially be challenged through the appropriate revisional/inherent jurisdiction depending upon the nature of the order and the court which passed it. Section 144 BNSS governs maintenance of wives, children and parents, and Section 145 deals with the procedure and territorial jurisdiction.

Therefore, do not assume that dismissal for non-appearance means that she has permanently lost her maintenance claim. She may have remedies against the dismissal, and in appropriate circumstances she may also institute a fresh proceeding based on a subsequent cause/circumstances. The exact limitation should be calculated from the certified copy of the June 2026 order and the statute/provision under which her case was registered.

The fact that the maintenance case was dismissed because of her absence is nevertheless useful for your defence. You should preserve:

• the complete order;
• order sheets showing her non-appearance;
• summons/service reports;
• the dates on which she failed to appear; and
• the complete pleadings and allegations made by her.

If she later alleges that you deliberately abandoned or neglected her, the dismissal order and the procedural history can become relevant evidence.

As regards withdrawing your RCR, I would first ask you one fundamental question:

Do you genuinely want your wife to return and resume matrimonial life, subject to reasonable conditions, or do you now genuinely believe that cohabitation is impossible?

If you genuinely want her back, do not withdraw the RCR merely because you are afraid of a possible future case. The pending RCR can demonstrate that you have been asserting your willingness to resume matrimonial life rather than deliberately abandoning her.

On the other hand, if you have genuinely decided that you cannot safely or reasonably resume cohabitation with her, continuing an RCR merely as a defensive device may create an inconsistency in your position. In that situation, the pleadings and the consequences of withdrawal should first be examined before taking a decision.

There is also an important point concerning your allegation that she previously had maintenance and a 498A proceeding against her former husband. That fact by itself does not establish that she will file a false case against you, nor should you plead it as though it proves criminal propensity. However, if the previous proceedings are genuine and relevant, you should obtain certified copies and preserve them. Their relevance can be assessed if she makes specific allegations against you in the future.

As to whether she can institute proceedings against you even though you lived together only for about two months in 2022: yes, potentially. The short period of cohabitation does not by itself immunise you from future proceedings.

For example, a complaint alleging cruelty by the husband or his relatives can potentially be brought under Sections 85–86 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 if the ingredients are alleged and established. Section 85 specifically deals with cruelty by a husband or his relative.

Similarly, proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act can potentially be instituted where the statutory territorial requirements are satisfied. Section 27 permits proceedings where the aggrieved person temporarily or permanently resides, where the respondent resides, or where the cause of action arose.

Thus, your having lived together for only April–May 2022 does not by itself prevent a later complaint. What will matter is the specific allegations, the dates, the territorial jurisdiction and the evidence supporting them.

Your statement that you are "scared to take her back" should also be treated seriously. An RCR decree does not mean that you should physically bring someone into your home regardless of your safety concerns. If there are genuine allegations of past threats, violence, coercion or serious matrimonial conflict, the factual record should be carefully documented before taking any step towards resumption of cohabitation.

Regarding court notices, never refuse a court notice merely to avoid service. That is generally counterproductive. Refusal of a registered/summoned communication can itself become part of the service record, and a court may proceed on the basis of deemed/valid service depending upon the applicable procedure and circumstances.

If a notice comes from a court, accept it, immediately obtain a copy of the underlying petition/complaint and order, and have it examined before the next date. If it is a police notice, summons or notice under BNSS, it should likewise not simply be ignored.

In your situation, I would adopt the following strategy:

First, obtain the certified copy of the June 2026 maintenance dismissal order and the complete order-sheet.

Second, obtain the complete RCR petition, written statement/reply, and all interim orders in your RCR proceeding.

Third, obtain certified copies of the earlier proceedings involving her and her former husband, rather than relying merely on what you have been told.

Fourth, prepare a chronological record from June 2020 to the present—particularly her departure in June 2020, return in April 2022, departure again in June 2022, the maintenance case in August 2024, your RCR filing, and the June 2026 dismissal.

Fifth, do not send threatening or accusatory communications to her or her family. Keep communications factual and preferably through counsel where litigation is already pending.

Sixth, before withdrawing the RCR, decide whether your real objective is reconciliation or legal separation without divorce. The answer materially changes the appropriate strategy.

One further point: if your concern is that her returning to the matrimonial home may expose you or your parents to allegations, do not attempt to solve that problem by secretly recording or manufacturing evidence. Instead, if reconciliation is genuinely contemplated, it can be structured through mediation/counselling and documented communication, with appropriate safeguards.

On the facts presently given, I would not rush to withdraw the RCR. The fact that she left repeatedly, that the maintenance proceeding was dismissed for non-appearance, and that there has been prolonged separation may be relevant to your overall defence. But whether keeping the RCR pending is strategically beneficial depends heavily upon the exact relief sought and the pleadings already filed.

If you provide the RCR petition and the June 2026 maintenance dismissal order, I can examine them together and tell you specifically whether withdrawal, continuation, amendment of pleadings, or pursuing the RCR to judgment is the safer course in your circumstances.