ORDER

1. The applicants/accused has filed this criminal revision under section 397 read with section 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 22.8.2023 passed by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Sessions Trial No. 791/2022, whereby the charges under section 376 r/w 34, 190 and 506-II of IPC have been framed against the applicants.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 21.8.2022 prosecutrix lodged a report at Police Station Chhola Mandir, District Bhopal Dehat alleging that co-accused Abhishek Gupta (son of applicant No.2 and brother of applicant No.1) lived in her neighbourhood, therefore, she was acquaintance to him. On 12.4.2021 co-accused Abhishek Gupta came to her house and proposed her for marriage to which she agreed. On 08.07.2021, prosecutrix went to the house of accused and gave her consent regarding marriage with Abhishek to his mother (applicant No.2) and his brother (applicant No.1). At that time, applicants forcibly sent the prosecutrix with co-accused Abhishek and closed the door of room where Abhishek made physical relation with prosecutrix. On 2.8.2021, in New Shikha Hotel, co-accused Abhishek and prosecutrix exchanged rings. Abhishek assured her for marriage and established physical relation with her. On the next day, prosecutrix went to applicants’ house and informed them regarding the said incident then applicants told the prosecutrix that to make physical relations before marriage is now-a-days common and they again sent Abhishek and prosecutrix in a room and closed the door where Abhishek again made physical relation with prosecutrix. At that time, applicants were sitting outside the room. On 29.12.2021, mother of prosecutrix died due to cancer thereafter applicants denied to get married Abhishek with prosecutrix. Hence, prosecutrix lodged a report against the applicants and co-accused person at Police Station Chhola Mandir, District Bhopal Dehat under sections 376, 376(2)(n), 190, 506-II and 34 of IPC. Statements of prosecutrix under section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. have been recorded. After investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.

3. After committal of the case an application was filed under section 227 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicants for discharging them from the case but the same was dismissed and the learned trial court framed the charges against the applicants under section 376 r/w 34, 506-II and 190 of IPC which has been assailed in this revision application.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that prosecutrix is well educated lady. She filed a written complaint before the police but in that complaint names of both the applicants were not mentioned. Main accused is Abhishek Gupta and he was in love relationship with prosecutrix and they exchanged rings with the consent of both the family members, therefore, no offence under section 376 of IPC is made out against them. Name of present applicants was mentioned in the statements of prosecutrix recorded under section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., therefore it appears that all the allegations made against the applicants are afterthought. In view of above, it is further submitted that learned trial Court has committed gross error to frame the charges against the applicants under section 376 r/w 34, 506-II and 190 of IPC , therefore, charges framed are liable to be set aside. He has placed reliance upon the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Damu Khare v. The State of Maharashtra and another passed on 26.11.2024 in SLP (Crl.) No.4326/2018.

5. Learned counsel for the State supported the impugned order and prays for rejection of this revision petition. It is further submitted by State that at the stage of framing of charges, only prima facie case is to be seen. Material on record discloses the offence for which charge-sheet has been filed against the accused persons. It is further submitted that there are specific allegation against the present applicants regarding abetment of rape and learned trial Court has correctly passed th