B. Rajendran, J.

1. The accused in C.C. No. 6488 of 2012 on the file of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai are the revision petitioners in this Criminal Revision Case. They are aggrieved by the order dated 15.05.2014 passed by the trial court whereby the petition filed by them under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. to discharge them from the criminal proceedings, has been dismissed. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

(i) The first accused is the father in law of defacto complainant. The second accused is her mother-in-law, the third accused is the sister-in-law and fourth accused is the husband of the third accused. The fifth accused is the husband of the defacto complainant. According to the defacto complainant, one day prior to her marriage with the fifth accused on 26.08.2014, all the accused came to her house and demanded a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs towards dowry and a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs was paid to them on the same day. On the date of marriage on 27.08.2014, the father of the defacto complainant gave 100 sovereigns of gold as demanded by the accused. However, on the date of marriage, the accused have made a demand for additional of Rs. 25 lakhs out of which Rs. 15 lakhs was to be given to A-3 and A-4 and Rs. 10 lakhs to be set apart for the marriage expenses of Divyalakshmi, younger sister of A-5.

(ii) Between 09.09.2004 and 17.05.2005, the defacto complainant and the fifth accused stayed at Seattle, United States of America. Even during such stay, the accused 1 to 4 have instigated the fifth accused to harass and compel the defacto complainant to pay the balance Rs. 25 lakhs towards dowry. On this pretext, the fifth accused harassed the defacto complainant during their stay at America. Unable to bear the harassment, the defacto complainant returned to India on 17.05.2005. However, on the advise of elders and after discussion, the defacto complainant went back to United States of America on 07.07.2005. During the course of such stay, A-5, at the instigation of A-2, compelled and harassed the defacto complainant to swallow certain tablets due to the effect of which the defacto complainant became unconscious. Thereafter, A-2 and A-5 have left the house while the defacto complainant was lying unconscious by locking the door. After gaining consciousness, the defacto complainant called the police and on their intervention she was rescued. Thus, once again, the defacto complainant returned to India on 26.02.2006 unable to bear the harassment meted out to her at the hands of A-2 and A-5. Once again, there was a mediation by the elders of both sides and as per their advise, the defacto complainant went back to America on 12.03.2006.

(iii) During April 2006, the defacto complainant became pregnant, but A-2 and A-5 attempted to abort the pregnancy. In fact, the fifth accused kicked the defacto complainant in her abdomen when she was pregnant to ensure miscarriage of the pregnancy. In such circumstances, the defacto complainant was unable to bear the harassment and torture, hence, she left America to India with the help of her father.

(iv) After the defacto complainant returned to India, A-2 and A-3 came to the residence of the defacto complainant at Chennai. During their visit, they have engaged in a quarrel with the defacto complainant and dragged her out and forced her to come to the hospital to abort the pregnancy and she was rescued by her cousin. Ultimately on 14.01.2007, the defacto complainant gave birth to a female child and the same was informed to the accused. However, none of them have even come to see the child. However, on 09.06.2007, A-5 came to the house of the defacto complainant and engaged in a quarrel. During such altercation, A-5 attacked the defacto complainant and attempted to take away the child. When the attempt of A-5 to take away the child was resisted, A-5 scolded the defacto complainant and her parents in vulgar words and threatened them with dire consequences.

(v) On 18.08.2