The court reaffirmed that a prima facie case must be established for proceeding with criminal charges, emphasizing the trial's role in determining the truth.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant assails the common order dated 08.05.2023 passed by High Court for Judicature of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior in Criminal Revision No.5766 of 2019, Criminal Revision No. 5767 of 2019 and Criminal Revision 5768 of 2019 whereby the High Court allowed Criminal Revision filed by Respondent no. 2 to 5 and quashed the order dated 07.11.2019 passed by 3rd Additional Session Judge, District- Vidisha against Respondent No. 2 framing charges under section 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 IPC and in alternate under Section 302 read with Section 34, and 201 of Indian Penal Code. By the same order, the High Court also quashed the order passed on 13.11.2019 against Respondent No. 3 to 5, framing charges under section 498-A, 306 read with Section 34 and in alternate under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The Appellant Ranjit Mittal is the son of Complainant- Mr. Kailash Mittal who passed away on 21.02.2023. The Complainant was father of Anjali Agarwal, the deceased.

3. The brief facts leading to framing of charges against Respondent No.2 to 5 are as follows:

4. Deceased Anjali Agarwal was married to Respondent No.2 Sulabh Agarwal on 06.05.2006. After three years of marriage, daughter Mohi was born to them. In 2015, they had a son named Anshaj. She was living in her matrimonial home at Arihant Vihar Colony in Vidisha with her mother-in-law- Madhu Agarwal and father-in-law- Kailash Babu Agarwal who are Respondent No. 3 and 4 respectively. Respondent No. 5, Shilpi Agarwal is sister-in-law of the deceased and she is married.

5. On 10.03.2018, a Merg intimation was registered at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Vidisha (M.P.) based on information by a ward boy working in District Hospital Vidisha that deceased Anjali Agarwal was brought dead to Hospital. She was brought by husband of the deceased Anjali Agrawal. It was reported that she had fallen from the terrace of her house. Thereafter, Merg No.16/2018 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. was recorded. Dead-body panchnama was prepared and dead body was sent for postmortem. As per the postmortem report dated 10.03.2018, the cause of death was hemorrhage and mode of death was shock.

6. It is to be noted that on 10.03.2018, around 10.30 in morning the neighbor of the deceased- Sandeep Sunhare saw her lying on her stomach at a backdoor of another house. He informed her husband Sulabh Agarwal and all people assembled. Respondent took her to Chetan hospital by placing her on handcart. Another neighbor of the deceased, Mona Singh has stated that Anjali was not wearing anything on her hands and feet.

7. On 17.05.2018, First Information Report (FIR No. 0381/2018) was registered against Respondent No. 2 Sulabh Agarwal under section 498-A and 306 of IPC. Further Section 201 and 34 of IPC were added against Respondent No. 2 to 5. Respondent No.2 to 5 were arrested on 22.07.2018 and 08.07.2019.

8. After the investigation, charge-sheet bearing no. 292/19 was filed under section 498 A, 306, 201 and 34 of IPC against the Respondent No. 2 to 5 on 27.09.2019. In the charge sheet, 27 witnesses were cited for examination. The case was committed for trial as ST No. 55/2019 before the 3rd Additional Session Judge, District Vidisha.

9. Thereafter, Charges were framed by the 3rd Additional Session Judge, District- Vidisha against the Respondent No. 2 under section 498 A, 306 read with Section 34 of IPC and in alternate section 302 read with section 34 and 201 of IPC by order dated 07.11.2019. Against the Respondent No. 3 to 5 Charges were framed under section 498-A, 306 read with section 34 of IPC and in alternate under section 302 read with section 34 and 201 of IPC by order dated 13.11.2019.

10. Aggrieved by these orders, the accused Respondents filed Criminal Revisions under section 397 read with section 401 of CrPC, before the High Court of Judicature at Madhya Pradesh. The High Court by the Impugned order, set aside the order of trial court, thereby quashing the charg