The court reaffirmed that at the charge framing stage, it is sufficient for the prosecution to show that prima facie evidence exists to warrant trial, without weighing the evidence as in a full trial.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.

1. The present revision petition under Sections 397/401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") has been filed by the petitioners for setting aside the impugned order dated 23.11.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, North-West District, Rohini Courts, New Delhi in case FIR bearing no. 765/2016, registered at Police Station Keshav Puram, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/304B/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") whereby charges have been framed against petitioners and other accused persons under Sections 498A/304B/302/34 IPC.

2. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner no. 1 and the deceased got married to each other on 28.01.2016.After marriage, both parties started living separately from the family of petitioner no. 1, till 10.11.2016, after which they shifted to the house of their parents i.e., matrimonial house of deceased as the deceased was pregnant. On 21.11.2016, at about 11:58 A.M., a PCR call, vide DD no. 27-A, regarding admission of deceased at Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi was received at P.S. Keshav Puram, Delhi. The concerned police officer went to the hospital and found that deceased was under treatment and was unfit for statement, as mentioned in MLC No. 904/16, but after sometime, she passed away during the course of being treated. An FIR bearing no. 765/2016 was registered on 22.11.2016, on the basis of statement of the mother of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

3. The police after investigation submitted the charge sheet under Sections 498A/302/304B/34 IPC, whereupon cognizance was taken against the petitioners and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. The learned Trial Court vide order dated 23.11.2017 framed the charges against the accused persons, including the petitioners, relevant portion of which is as under:

"...This FIR was registered on-the statement ofSmt. Shashi, who is the mother of deceased on 22/11/2016 but it is relevant here to state that during course of investigation IO has recorded her supplementary statement u/s 161 CrPC and also statementof other witnesses including her husband Ram Bilas,Shivang and Ujjwal both s/o Sh.Ram Bilas and others including neighbours Smt. Rama Gupta and Smt. Sana Gupta. All of them have averred that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment on account of demand of dowry. The-statement of the parents and brothers of the deceasedarevery detailed giving details of various incidents about such torture and harassment to the deceased at the hands of the applicants and the other family members. The deceased was having three months pregnancy and she expired within around 10 months of the marriage. The post mortem report and the subsequent opinion of thedoctor taken by the investigating agency also goes against the accused persons. The circumstances argued by Ld. Counsel for the applicant to show that the injury on her face and lip could be the result of force applied during gastric lavage procedure is matter oftrial.

It is settled law that, at the stage of considerati