The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for material to substantiate charges and the importance of evaluating evidence at the stage of framing charges.

JAISHREE THAKUR, J.

1. The instant petition has been filed under section 482, Cr.P.C for quashing of the order dated 13.03.2013 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Jhajjar (Annexure P-12) whereby Section 313, IPC has been added to the report filed under section 173 (2), Cr.P.C.

2. In brief, the facts are that the complainant-respondent No. 2 (hereinafter respondent No.2) Rekha was married with Parvesh Rathi petitioner No. 1 on 21.11.2007. On account of matrimonial differences that arose between the parties, respondent No. 2 instituted a complaint dated 27.05.2010 before Superintendent of Police, Jhajjar levelling allegations of cruelty and maltreatment. The matter was referred to the Women Cell on 19.07.2010 and a detailed inquiry was conducted therein. On 19.07.2010 itself, a statement of respondent No. 2 was recorded by Women Cell and thereafter on the basis of the enquiry, it was recommended that FIR be registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, IPC against the petitioners herein.

3. Fir No. 315 dated 22.7.2010 was registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, IPC Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh in which it was alleged by respondent No. 2 that she had solemnized the marriage with Parvesh Rathi on 21.11.2007 as per Hindu rites and rituals. But within 15 days of her marriage, her in-laws started harassing and maltreating her on account of inadequate dowry. It was submitted that sufficient dowry was given at the time of the marriage, however, they were not satisfied. It was further submitted that she became pregnant and her mother-in-law and husband forcibly gave her medicine to abort the pregnancy and when the medicine did not have its effect, they gave beatings to her. It is further alleged that her mother-in-law kicked her in her abdomen in order to abort the pregnancy and thereafter both of them took her to Bharat Hospital near Sonepat bus stand and got her the pregnancy terminated against her wishes in December, 2007. As the matter was pending before JMIC, Bahadurgarh, respondent No. 2 submitted an application for denial of bail and a fair investigation with addition of Section 313, IPC as an offence. Accordingly, reply was filed to the said application and ultimately, the matter was investigated by the SHO, Police Station, Jhajjar who submitted reply dated 07.08.2010, stating therein that the matter had been investigated and Dr. Rita Gulati, MBBS, MD stated that pregnancy of one month cannot be aborted and, therefore, the investigation revealed that Section 313, IPC is not attracted. Another application dated 01.06.2011 was made for addition of Section 313, IPC to the charge sheet and to direct the police to conduct further investigation in the case. The same was declined, holding that the matter had been investigated properly and no offence is made out under Section 313, IPC. This order was challenged and Additional Session Judge, Jhajjar by impugned order, held there was sufficient allegation to charge the accused persons with commission of offence under Section 313, IPC and accordingly committed the matter to be heard before the Sessions Court. Aggrieved against the said order, the instant criminal revision petition has been filed.

4. Mr. Sunil Sihag, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contends that the allegations of having committed the offence of getting an abortion done are unsustainable and, therefore, the offence under Section 313, IPC cannot be added to the charges already framed under Sections 406, 498-A and 506, IPC. It is contended that when the matter was investigated by the Women Cell and the statement of the respondent No. 2 recorded, there were no such allegations raised therein. Respondent No. 2 only submitted that she had been harassed on account of inadequate dowry and it is only subsequent thereto that an improvement has been made by levelling allegations of having committed the offence of getting pregnancy forcibly terminated. It is also submitted that the matter has been inves