JAI BHAGWAN DHANAK Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 29.04.2014, vide which an application filed by the prosecution/complainant under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, "Cr.P.C.") for summoning Omi @ Om Pati wife of Suraj Bhan (mother -in -law), Pawan son of Suraj Bhan (brother -in -law), Suraj Bhan son of Prahlad Singh (father -in -law) and Sandeep (a cousin of husband) of deceased Sushma as additional accused in First Information Report No.296 dated 04.11.2013 registered at Police Station Barauda, District Sonepat under Section 304 -B of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "I.P.C."), was dismissed, the petitioner -complainant Jai Bhagwan filed the instant criminal revision.

(2.) PRECISELY , the facts relevant for disposal of the instant petition are that on 04.11.2013 an information was received by the police regarding death of one Sushma wife of Kuldeep son of Suraj Bhan due to hanging. Jai Bhagwan, father of deceased Sushma gave a written complaint to Sub Inspector Sishan Kumar, alleging that his daughter, who was married on 28.06.2012 with Kuldeep, had been killed by her in -laws on account of nonfulfillment of demand of dowry. He added that marks of strangulation were seen on the neck of the deceased and that at the time of death she was 6/7 months pregnant. The said allegations were levelled against Kuldeep, his father Suraj Bhan, mother Omi @ Om Pati and brother Pawan.

(3.) KULDEEP and Suraj Bhan were charge -sheeted for commission of offence under Section 304 -B read with Section 34 of I.P.C. As they pleaded not guilty, prosecution was called upon to lead evidence. Jai Bhagwan, father of the deceased was examined and thereafter an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. was filed for summoning the persons named above as additional accused.