ORDER

1. THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN IN A REVISION FILED BY THE ACCUSED IN SESSIONS CASE NO. 64 OF 1996. THE SESSIONS JUDGE HAD FRAMED THE CHARGES AGAINST THE ACCUSED UNDER SECTIONS 304-B AND 498-A OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME, HE PREFERRED THE REVISION ALLEGING THAT THESE OFFENCES WERE NOT MADE OUT AND HE WAS ENTITLED TO BE DISCHARGED. THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE ALLOWED THE REVISION PETITION AND CHARGES FRAMED UNDER SECTIONS 304-B AND 498-A IPC WERE QUASHED BUT AT THE SAME TIME DIRECTED THE SESSIONS COURT TO FRAME CHARGES UNDER SECTION 306 IPC.

2. THE COMPLAINANTS DAUGHTER SARITA GOT MARRIED TO FIRST ACCUSED VINAY @ PAPPU ON 4-2-1995. SARITA STARTED STAYING WITH HER HUSBAND BUT IT SEEMS THAT THERE WERE MATRIMONIAL DISPUTES AND SARITA ALLEGED THAT SHE WAS SUBJECTED TO CRUELTY AND HARASSMENT. IT IS ALLEGED THAT TWO MONTHS AFTER THE SOLEMNISATION OF THE MARRIAGE, THE HUSBAND VINAY @ PAPPU AND HIS PARENTS, ROSHAN AND KUNTI DEMANDED DOWRY AND INTIMIDATED SARITA. SARITAS SISTER SAPNA HAD VISITED THE HOUSE OF THE ACCUSED AND SHE REPORTED TO HER FATHER THAT SARITA WAS NOT HAPPY IN THE MATRIMO