J U D G M E N T

VIKRAM NATH, J. 1. Leave granted.

2. The present criminal appeal arises from an order of the Gujarat High Court, dated 09.05.2024, whereby the Court rejected the Criminal Revision Application No. 536 of 2024 filed by the appellants herein and refused to discharge the appellants – accused from offences punishable under sections 306, 498A and

114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, [Digitally signed by]

Signature Not Verified NEETU KHAJURIA Date: 2024.12.10

1 R8 e: a2 s8 o:3 n9 : IST 1 IPC

3. FIR No. 11206038210259 of 2021 dated 18.04.2021 was registered at the instance of the deceased’s father against the appellants herein for offences under sections 306, 498A, 114 of the IPC. It was alleged that the appellant no.1 was married to the deceased – wife in the year 2009. The deceased – wife was residing in the matrimonial house with her in-laws, that is, appellant nos. 2 and 3. For the first five years of the marriage, no child was born to the couple. The deceased – wife was subjected to physical and mental harassment owing to this and thus returned to her parental home. When she returned to her matrimonial home on being convinced by her parents, a son was born to the deceased in the next few years. Around twelve months before the alleged incident, the deceased had informed her father – the informant that the appellant – accused had sold her ornaments, given to her as streedhan during her marriage, and whenever she demanded return of the same, she was physically and mentally harassed. On 18.04.2021, the informant received information that the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself. It is alleged that it was due to the physical and mental harassment meted out by the appellant –

accused that the deceased was compelled to commit suicide.

4. Appellants had earlier sought quashing of the FIR, which petition was dismissed by the High Court and even the Special Leave Petition before this Court against the dismissal order of the High Court was dismissed as withdrawn. The appellants thereafter preferred an application seeking discharge under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732 on the ground that, prima facie, the ingredients for the offence of abetment as provided under Section 107 of IPC are not made out against them. As per the complaint the incident had taken place twelve months ago. In the circumstances prima facie instigation is not proved, therefore the offence as per sections 306, 498A, 114 of the IPC are not made out against them. The Sessions Court, vide order dated 28.02.2024, dismissed the discharge application observing that in the circumstances of the case, it did not seem just and proper to discharge or acquit any accused person without recording evidence on all the facts alleged.

2 CrPC

5. Appellants challenged the above order before the High Court in a Criminal Revision Petition, wherein the High Court in the impugned order has dismissed the same and held that the appellants failed to bring any material on record to prove that a prima facie case is not made out to frame charges against them. The Court, while dismissing the revision petition, observed that at the stage of charge framing, the Court's role is preliminary and limited to determining whether a prima facie case exists. The test applied is whether the materials presented by the prosecution, taken at its face value, disclose ingredients of the alleged offence. The Court is not required to evaluate the probative value of the evidence or assess its sufficiency for conviction. Instead, it only has to consider whether there is a strong suspicion that the accused might have committed the offence. This suspicion must be based on credible material and not on arbitrary conclusions. In the present case, witness statements revealed that the deceased had faced consistent physical and mental harassment by the accused. The harassment included selling the deceased's gold ornaments, which was her streedhan, and torturing her when she demanded their