- (1.) HEARD the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
(2.) THE Revision is filed challenging the dismissal of the petition filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning Usha Rani, the mother in law and Bireshwar Singh Yadav, the father in law of the complainant Meenal Malik.
(3.) THE trial court having seriously adverted to the evidence of PW1, the father of the complainant and PW2, the complainant herself come to a conclusion that those witnesses had not spoken about any cruelty committed by the father in law and mother in law on the pretext of less dowry brought by the complainant. Of course, there is some allegation that the mother in law dragged the complainant when she had been to a temple with an intention to abort the foetus she was carrying. But the admitted position is that the foetus was not aborted. In fact there was a normal delivery and the complainant gave birth to a son. I find that the trial court rightly evaluated the evidence of PW 1 and PW2 and rejected the prayer for summoning the mother in law and father in law of the complainant.;