( 1 ) THIS revision is directed against the orders dated 05. 10. 2009 passed in Crl. M. P. No. 395 of 2009 in Criminal Appeal No. 147 of 2009 by the learned V Additional Metropolitan sessions Judge (Mahila Court)-cum-XIX additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad.

( 2 ) THE petitioners herein who are A2, A4 and A5 filed a petition under Section 391 cr. P. C to summon P. Ws. 1 and 8 for further cross-examination to elicit certain omissions and contradictions as additional evidence. Since the said petition was dismissed, the petitioners herein filed the present revision challenging the said order.

( 3 ) THE brief facts of the case are as follows. The de facto complainant P. Madhavi who is examined as P. W. I is the wife of A1. A2 is the father-in-law, A3 is the mother-in-law, A4 is the brother-in-law and A5 is the sister-in-law of P. W. 1. PW. 1 lodged a complaint to the police stating that she is working as Senior accountant in Government Central Press, chanchalguda, Hyderabad, and that her marriage was performed with Al in the year 1993 and that at the time of marriage her parents gave Rs. 2,00,000/- dowry and rs. 50,000/- towards other expenses and that after marriage she joined her husban

Click Here to Read the rest of this document