( 1 ) THE petitioners have been charged for offences under sections 498-A/304-B of the Indian Penal Code. The deceased got married to petitioner No. 3, Charanjit Singh, on 26. 3. 2000. She committed suicide on 26. 5. 2000. The FIR was registered on the statement of Sohan Singh Gujral, the father of the deceased, which was recorded by Mr. Shamim Akhtar, SDM on 29. 5. 2000. He narrates in the statement that Sarabjeet was married to Charanjit and thereafter she went with her husband on a honeymoon to Dalhousie; that charanjit brought her back to Jabalpur on 6. 4. 2000 so that she could take her b. Ed, examinations; that Sarabjeet left Jabalpur, the deceased parents house asking her to secure good marks in her examination; that Sarabjeet stayed there till 13. 5. 2000 and during this period Charanjit used to call her up but sarabjeet remained sad; that on inquiry she kept saying that they were making demands and were not able to adjust with her; that on 12. 5. 2000 charanjit came to take her back and Sarabjeet although not willing to go back went with her husband on the advice of her father; that on 16. 5. 2000 at 11. 30 p. m. Sarabjeet told me on phone that "they" were making demands but did not answer all the questions properly and that on 26. 5. 2000 at 6. 30 p. m. the father of Sarabjeet, petitioner No. 1 herein, called me up and told me that sarabjeet was not well; on reaching on 27. 5. 2000 at night he was told by her sister, who lived in Delhi, that she had seen the body of Sarabjeet and that she had been strangulated and had been hung. A suicide note was shown to me by 10 Babu Lal.

( 2 ) THE mother of the deceased also made a statement on 29. 5. 2000 before the S. D. M. in which she makes a specific allegation that the petitioners were asking for a Maruti car and that the deceased feared that unless the Maruti car was given she would be killed by the petitioners. The mother further stated before the SDM that the deceased used to remain depressed and even in her sleep she used to talk about her fear of being killed unless the Maruti car had been given.

( 3 ) THE learned trial Court on the basis of these two statements framed charges under Sections 498-A/304-B of the Indian Penal Code. The impugned order says that the accused had relied upon the suicide note on which no allegation of any kind had been made against the petitioners. The charge was, however, made as the learned trial Court found that the statements of witnesses and documents brought on record provided sufficient material for framing of charge.

( 4 ) IN the revision petition the petitioners have raised several grounds for challenging the impugned order. It has been pointed out that the E-mails exchanged between the deceased and her husband which express deep love between the two have not been taken into account by the learned trial Court. These, E-mails and letters, it is stated at the bar by Mr. K. T. S. Tulsi, Senior advocate appearing for the petitioners, and not disputed by the state, were seized by the investigation and have been placed on the challan file. It is further pointed out here that the statements of the mother of the deceased was self-contradictory and that the statement of the father of the deceased was vague. The suicide note itself stated that she committed suicide because she was not proving to be a good wife and that the members of the petitioners family have been cordial towards her. The E-mails and letters together with the suicide note, Mr. Tulsi submits, showed that the deceased was not prepared for a matrimonial knot and could not adjust and find herself in the new surroundings of the matrimonial home and, therefore, went into depression.

( 5 ) BEFORE going to the law cited by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, it will be appropriate to have a look at the contents of the E-mails and letters and to the suicide note. The handwriting of the suicide note has been established by forensic laboratory and there is no doubt