ZAMIL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant revision impugns the order dated April 7, 1998 of the learned Sessions Judge Jhunjhunu whereby charge under section 498A and 304B of the Indian Penal Code has been framed against the accused petitioner.

(2.) Mr. S.S. Naruka, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner canvassed that from the FIR it is evident that the marriage of the deceased Suni @ Sunina had taken place with petition Zamil some 17-18 years-back and as such provisions enumerated under Sections 304 B and 498A Penal Code are not attracted and no case under these sections, is exfacie established. Reliance was placed on Gurditta Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (1992 Cr.L.J. 309) , Bhagwan Sahai Vs. Raju and others (1996 (1) WLC (Raj.) 139) and Jai Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan (RLW 1994 (2) 549) .

(3.) On the other hand Mr. M.L. Goyal, learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned order and contended that prima-facie case under sections 304B and 498A Penal Code made out from the material on record.