Crl. Rev. No.1154 of 2010 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No.1154 of 2010 (O&M). Decided on: October 01, 2010. Smt. Suman Devi .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Navneet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amit Rana, DAG., Haryana. Mr.Jai Vir Gupta, Advocate. M.M.S. BEDI, J (ORAL). The petitioner is the mother-in-law of deceased Shabnam who has been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C., by the trial Court while dismissing the application qua sister-in-law and the brother-in-law. The trial Court has passed a detailed order clearly . . . 1 Crl. Rev. No.1154 of 2010 (O&M) making a distinction of the allegations against the petitioner and the general allegations against the sister-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the allegations against the petitioner are vague and that the suicide note is indicative of the fact that the in-laws of the deceased are not responsible for her suicide. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and going through the statements of PW3 Ram Krishan Yadav complainant and PW.12 Sumitra. It appears that the prosecution has been, to some extent, able to discharge the initial onus attracting the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act. Whether the material brought on record is rebuttable with sufficient material cannot be determined, at this stage. Since the initial onus has been discharged by the prosecution, the evidence will be produced by the petitioner to establish that the petitioner is entitled to acquittal. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court in summoning the petitioner as additional accused. No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE October 01, 2010. rka . . . 2