SATENDRA KUMAR MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Ravindra Prakash Srivastav, learned counsel for the revisionists, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, Shri Anoop Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the records of the case.

(2.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 8.11.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (P.C. Act) Court no. 4, District-Gorakhpur in Sessions Trial No. 248 of 2016 (State Vs. Satendra Kumar Mishra and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 483 of 2014, under Sec. 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Sec. 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Shahpur, District-Gorakhpur whereby the application moved by the revisionists for discharge under Sec. 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Sec. 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act has been rejected and charge fixed for framing charges in the above mentioned sections.

(3.) The facts which are requisite to be stated for adjudication of this revision are that opposite party no. 2 has lodged a first information report against the revisionists on 21.10.2014 at about 23:30 o'clock which is registered as case crime no. 483 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Sec. 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Shahpur, District-Gorakhpur alleging therein that her marriage was solemnized with the revisionist no. 1 Satendra Kumar Mishra on 15.2.2006 as per Hindu rites and rituals, and sufficient dowry was given in the marriage. But the revisionists were not satisfied with the dowry and used to torture her by raising demand of one car and Rs. 5 lakhs as additional dowry. On 1.6.2014, revisionists beaten her and also ousted her from their house, therefore, she made a complaint before the police, but on intervention of some respected persons matter has been settled. But after sometime they again beaten her. On 7.10.2014 information has been received by the informant that revisionists have administered poison to his daughter, thereafter, he came at the house of revisionists and found got admitted her to Medical College and she discharged on 8.10.2014. Pursuant to an F.I.R., Investigating Officer after concluding investigation submitted the charge-sheet under Sec. 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Sec. 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the revisionists. During trial, revisionists moved the discharge application on 30.8.2016 which was rejected by the court concerned. Being aggrieved, the revisionists came up in this revision.