20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 495/2008 RAKESH & ORS ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Y.N. Singh, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Arvind Kumar Gupta, APP. Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Mr. Vijayender Kumar, Mr. Gurpreet, Advocates for the complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R % 08.04.2010 1. The present revision petition is directed against the order dated 24th May, 2008, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge framing charge under Section 304B/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The deceased Ms. Yogita got married with the petitioner No.1-Mr. Rakesh Kumar on 26th April, 2007. She committed suicide on 6th September, 2007 in the house of her in laws. 3. As per prosecution, on 6th September, 2007 at about 4 P.M. Mr. Navin, brother of the deceased-Ms. Yogita, received a telephone call from Ms. Rekha, sister-in-law of Ms. Yogita that they should come immediately as Ms. Yogita was not opening the door. Mr. Naveen reached at the matrimonial house of his sister and climbed on the cooler and saw from the window that her sister hanged herself. Thereafter, he called the police after dialing No.100. Statement of complainant was recorded and on that basis FIR was registered. 4. Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the suicide note and submits that the deceased had appreciated the conduct of her in-laws and had killed herself because she was suffering from incurable disease. As per the post mortem report, the deceased was not suffering from any incurable disease and in fact was pregnant and was carrying a child of about four months. Counsel for the State submits that the suicide note can be interpreted and read in different ways. According to him, the suicide note shows the sensitive and good nature of the deceased as she did want any of her in-laws to suffer any harm or harassment in spite of the fact that she was taking extreme step of killing herself because of them. 5. At this initial stage, it will not be correct to discharge the accused- petitioners on the basis of the suicide note. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has dealt with the questions and contentions in detail while framing the charge. The facts mentioned in the charge sheet and statements under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, I do not find any merit in the present revision petition and the same is dismissed. It is stated that the matter is fixed before the trial Court on 13th April, 2010. Trial Court record will be sent back. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are only for the purpose of the deciding the revision petition and will not be binding on the trial Court. SANJIV KHANNA, J. APRIL 08, 2010 NA/VKR