- (1.)Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State, as also learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 who has appeared through Advocate. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 16.12.2011 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat, in G.R. No. 756 of 2010/T.R. No. 2008 of 2011, whereby, an application filed by the petitioners under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C., for discharge, has been rejected by the Court below.
(2.)The petitioners have been made accused in Petarbar/Tenughat P.S. Case No. 73 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 756 of 2010. The petitioners are the husband and the in-laws of the informant and there is allegation against them in the F.I.R., making out the offence under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and 3 /4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It appears that after investigation, the police had submitted charge-sheet against the petitioners and the petitioners filed an application under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C., for discharge, which was rejected by the Court below.
(3.)It appears from the impugned order passed by the Court below that the Court below has only reproduced the allegations made in the F.I.R., and has rejected the application stating that there is sufficient evidence for framing charge against the petitioners and has fixed the date for framing the charge.