The main legal point established is that the court must consider the evidence and allegations in determining whether to frame charges or discharge accused persons.

JUDGMENT :

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 are present.

2. Heard the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

3. This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 17.02.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, F.T.C. (C.A.W), Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial Case No. 84 of 2021 and Sessions Trial Case No.77 of 2022 arising out of Nawadih P.S. Case No.101 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1562 of 2020 under sections 341, 323, 307, 498A & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act whereby and whereunder the application of the petitioner under section 227 of Cr.PC for discharge had been rejected.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the FIR, the allegations are made in regard to subjecting the victim to cruelty for demand of dowry and the two incidents are given in regard to the allegations that the murder was attempted on victim. One incident is on the occasion of Durgapuja in her matrimonial house she was beaten and the attempt was made to set her ablaze wherein her right hand also received burn injury. A panchayat was held but she did not go to move to the police station. The another incident is of 10.12.2020 when at 4 O'clock the victim was forced to sit by the accused person in car no. JH-01BT-9401 in order to commit her murder and the cloth was also tied on her mouth when they left the house. However she untied the cloth from her mouth and shouted for help near the village Godwadih wherein the villagers had intercepted the vehicle and surrounded the same. The accused persons made attempt to flee away after having thrown her from the vehicle. The villagers had apprehended her husband and mother-in-law whereas the father-in-law and the brother-in-law managed to flee away and the matter was referred to the police station concerned. In this incident the victim sustained injury on her right and left leg and both the hands.

5. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from the evidence collected by the investigating officer during investigation the first incident is not proved so far as the second incident is concerned, no one witness of the village had stated that the mouth of the victim was tied with any cloth rather it is stated that when the victim shouted and after hearing the screaming, the villagers intercepted the vehicle and the accused person in order to flee away pushed her out of the vehicle but at the same time her husband and mother-in-law both were apprehended by the villagers. So far as the injury report is concerned, there are three injuries and all the simple in nature. There is nothing on record to show the intention on the part of the accused person to commit murder of victim as such the offence under section 307 of IPC is not made out against the petitioners and the learned court below had rejected the application of the petitioners, in which, the petitioners have prayed for their discharge.

6. Herein the learned senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in this criminal revision he is pressing only this criminal revision to the extent that no charge under section 307 of IPC is made out against the petitioners.

7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the contentions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners and contended that certainly in regard to the first incident the panchayat was held but no member of the panchayat was interrogated by the investigating officer during investigation. As per FIR allegations, the victim did not go to the police station and there is no such evidence of the first occurrence in which the allegations are made in regard to setting her ablaze; but she has the burn injury mark on her hand. It is also further submitted that so far as the second incident is concerned, the victim was forced to sit in the vehicle