SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

1. Petitioners impugn order on charge dated 15.05.2018. Petitioner No. 1 is the father-in- law, petitioner No. 2 is the mother-in-law and petitioner No. 3 is the husband of the complainant/respondent No. 2. By the impugned order on charge, charge under Section 354/354A/354C IPC has been framed against the petitioner No. 1 (father-in-law). Charge under Section 498A/34 IPC r/w Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and under Section 323/34 IPC has been framed against all the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the basic ingredients of Sections 354/354A/354C/498A and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 323 IPC are not made out against any of the accused.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there was a delay of one month in making the complaint and initially an allegation was made of petitioner No. 1 having committed the offence of rape and subsequently in the 164 Cr.P.C. statement recorded before the Magistrate the allegation was diluted from rape to that of Section 354 IPC. This, it is contended, shows that the complaint initially made was false to the knowledge of the complainant and as such Trial Cour