1. Heard Shri Ravindra Prakash Srivastav, learned counsel for the revisionists, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, Shri Anoop Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the records of the case.

2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 8.11.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (P.C. Act) Court no. 4, District-Gorakhpur in Sessions Trial No. 248 of 2016 (State Vs. Satendra Kumar Mishra and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 483 of 2014, under Section 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Shahpur, District-Gorakhpur whereby the application moved by the revisionists for discharge under Section 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act has been rejected and charge fixed for framing charges in the above mentioned sections.

3. The facts which are requisite to be stated for adjudication of this revision are that opposite party no. 2 has lodged a first information report against the revisionists on 21.10.2014 at about 23:30 o'clock which is registered as case crime no. 483 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Shahpur, District-Gorakhpur alleging therein that her marriage was solemnized with the revisionist no. 1 Satendra Kumar Mishra on 15.2.2006 as per Hindu rites and rituals, and sufficient dowry was given in the marriage. But the revisionists were not satisfied with the dowry and used to torture her by raising demand of one car and Rs. 5 lakhs as additional dowry. On 1.6.2014, revisionists beaten her and also ousted her from their house, therefore, she made a complaint before the police, but on intervention of some respected persons matter has been settled. But after sometime they again beaten her. On 7.10.2014 information has been received by the informant that revisionists have administered poison to his daughter, thereafter, he came at the house of revisionists and found got admitted her to Medical College and she discharged on 8.10.2014. Pursuant to an F.I.R., Investigating Officer after concluding investigation submitted the charge-sheet under Section 498-A, 328, 323, 504 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against the revisionists. During trial, revisionists moved the discharge application on 30.8.2016 which was rejected by the court concerned. Being aggrieved, the revisionists came up in this revision.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionists submits that revisionist no. 4 namely Sheo Murti Mishra has also lodged a first information report against the opposite party no. 2 and three named persons and unknown on 12.4.2015 which is registered as case crime no. 152 of 2015, under sections 147, 452, 427, 379, 386, 323, 504, 506, 457, 120-B I.P.C.. He also filed a case under Section 340 Cr.P.C. before the court below on 24.3.2015. It is further submitted that revisionist no. 1 is the husband of informant's daughter, revisionist no. 2 is jeth who is handicapped person, revisionist nos. 4 and 5 are father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively, who are old persons and revisionist no. 3 is devar who is unemployed. Revisionists have no concern with the present case but opposite party no. 2 falsely implicated to them only for harassment in this case. Earlier, revisionists have filed a Criminal Misc. Application (under Section 482 Cr.P.C.) No. 37202 of 2016 (Satendra Kumar Mishra and others Vs. State of U.P. and another) before this Hon'ble Court which has been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file criminal revision on 17.12.2016. It is further submitted that revisionists have moved the discharge application which was rejected on 8.11.2016 by learned Additional Sessions' Judge/Special Judge (P.C. Act), Court no. 4, District-Gorakhpur, which is illegal, unjust and unsustainable in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed by the Hon'ble Court. It is also submitted that victim is s