Hon’ble Dinesh Gupta, J.—This revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 2.5.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. 1), Jaunpur in Sessions Trial No. 88 of 1997 (State v. Subhash and others) acquitting the accused opposite parties under Sections 498A, 304 B and 201 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that a First Information Report was lodged by complainant Paras Nath Yadav the revisionist on 1.3.1996 at Police Station Machhli Shahar, District-Jaunpur that the marriage of his daughter Pramila Devi aged 22 years was performed in May, 1990 and sufficient dowry was given at the time of marriage. In April, 1993 his daughter went to her in law’s house and when she returned to her house she told the complainant and other family members that her husband and other in-laws have demanded motor cycle. The complainant tried to persuade the accused persons and sent his daughter to her in-law’s house. On 25.2.1996 one Awadhesh Yadav who is related to accused Subhash informed the complainant that his daughter had expired and when the complainant enquired he was informed by some neighbours that his