B.S.Nehra, J.

1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 9th November, 1988 of Sh. Manjit Singh, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panipat, whereby he found a prima-facie case under section 494 read with section 109 IPC and framed charge-sheet against Chander Parkash and Geeta under section 494 IPC and the remaining accused under section 494 read with section 109 IPC.

2. The facts of the case are that the respondent, Hari Singh complainant (father of Surinder Kaur alias Veena) filed a complaint under section 494 read with section 109 IPC alleging that his daughter Surinder Kaur was married to Chander Parkash on 8-12-1982 at Panipat according to Anand Karaj rites. He spent about Rs. 80,000/- in the marriage and gave adequate dowry but his son-in law, Chander Parkash, the latters father and mother and other family members harassed Veena, daughter of the complainant, for bringing inadequate she was turned out of the house by the accused in wearing apparels and accused Sheilo mother of Chander Parkash accused and the latters sitters Asha and Seema left her (Veena) at the bus stand, Panipat and threatened her to be put to death. The accused also threatened t