JUDGMENT 1. -Instant revision impugns the order dated June 3, 1997 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar whereby charge under section 498A and 304 B of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the accused petitioner (for short the accused). 2. Brief resume of the facts is that a written report was instituted by Kishore Singh, the husband of the accused, with the Police Station Sadar Sikar on November 24, 1996 to the effect that his son's wife Prem Kanwar who was married about seven months ago, found dead in a water tank. The PS. Sadar registered a case bearing FIR No. 21 of 1996 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. Site plan of the water tank, Panchayatnama of the dead body of deceased Prem Kanwar. seizure memos of the clothes and ornaments of the deceased were drawn by the I.O. 3. On November 25, 1996, at 3.30 p.m. a written report was lodged by Roop Singh, the father of the deceased with the PS. Sadar stating therein that marriage of his daughter Prem Kanwar had taken place, with Chhagan Singh son of Kishore Singh on May 3, 1996 Prem Kanwar was departed with dowry consisting of golden ornaments, clothes, Television, watches furniture and cash. She lived in her Sasural only for two days and when came back with his sons Moti Singh and Hari Singh, she told that her mother in law became angry and thrown the wrist watch, given to her husband Chhagan Singh in the marriage, on the pretext that ring and ear-rings were not given to Chhagan Singh. Prem Kanwar lived for a period of six months in his house and thereafter left his house with her father in law Kishore Singh. At that time the informant handed over to Kishore Singh, ring, earrings and wrist watch of Chhagan Singh. Prem Kanwar was murdered by her mother in law Padam Kanwar on November 24, 1996 and her body was kept in a water tank. 4. On this report PS. Sadar registered a case under section 304 B of the I.PC. and FIR was sent to the Additional S.P Sikar for investigation Post-mortem of dead body of Prem Kanwar was conducted on November 25. 1996. According to Post- mortem report cause of death was 'asphyxia'. The accused was arrested. 4. On this report PS. Sadar registered a case under section 304 B of the I.PC. and FIR was sent to the Additional S.P Sikar for investigation Post-mortem of dead body of Prem Kanwar was conducted on November 25. 1996. According to Post- mortem report cause of death was 'asphyxia'. The accused was arrested. After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed and case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge, Sikar from where it was transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar. 5. Admittedly, many other relatives of the deceased were residing in her 'Sasural at the time of the incident but only her mother in-law Padam Kanwar was made the accused. Four sets of evidence are available in the charge sheet. The first set is the evidence of witnesses of partental house of deceased Prem Kanwar before whom she was alleged to have made complaint of the behaviour of the accused. The second set is the evidence of the witnesses of nearby locality of her 'Sasural who testify that the accused is ill-manned and short tampered lady. Third set is the evidence of Kishore Singh, the husband of the accused, on whose report FIR No. 21/96 was registered and who in his statement under section 161 Cr.PC. The second set is the evidence of the witnesses of nearby locality of her 'Sasural who testify that the accused is ill-manned and short tampered lady. Third set is the evidence of Kishore Singh, the husband of the accused, on whose report FIR No. 21/96 was registered and who in his statement under section 161 Cr.PC. stated that - " izsedaoj dks 'kknh ds ckn igyh ckj rkjh[k 21-11-96 dks eSa yk;k FkkA dy fn0 23-11-96 dks mldh lkl ftBkuh ljkst dsaoj iRuh txnh'k flag Fks] eSa [ksr esa dke djus x;k FkkA eSa [ksr ls 6-30 cts ?kj vk;k rc lHkh jkth [kq'kh ls FksA [kkuk [kk;kA djhc 7-30 cts [kk;kA nksuksa chu.kh lkFk jksVh [kk;h uhps Nijs esa izsedaoj [kk;h ogha ij cl daoj mej 16 lky] mlk daoj mez 13 lky tks esjh yM+dh gS rFkk NksVk cPpk [ksrflag mez 10 lky ftBkuh ljkst daoj mlh dejs esa lks;s FksA eSa esjs dejs esa lks x;k FkkA vkt rkjh[k 24-11-96 dks eSa lqcg 6-15 cts mBk esa mBdj VV~Vh pyk x;k okil ?kj x;k rks [ksrflag viuh eka o nksuksa cguksa dks efUnj ls 6-30 cts cqykdj yk;k og jksus yx x;k rks eSaus dgk D;k gks x;k rks dgk fcu.kh izse daoj ikuh ds dq.M esa iM+ xbZA eSa VkpZ ysdj ns[kh rks vUnj iM+h fn[khA eSaus o esjh vkSjr us mls idM+dj ckgj fudkykA izsedaoj gksn ds iSans esa mxw.kh rjQ nhoky ls cSBh gqbZ feyh------------ " And fourth set is the evidence of doctors, according to whom the cause of death of Prem Kanwar was asphyxia. 6. At the stage of framing the charge the learned trial court was required to evaluate the complete material and document' on record with a view to finding out if the facts emerging therefrom taken at their face value disclose the ingredients constituting the offences under section 304 B and 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. But it appears that the testimony of Kishore Singh who is the important witness of the case, has been completely overlooked All the four sets of evidence of the prosecution have not been properly evaluated by the learned court below with a view to finding out as to whether the deceased Prem Kanwar soon before her death was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand for dowry by the accused. Kishore Singh is the only witness examined by the Investigating Officer from the in- laws house of deceased Prem Kanwar and his testimony can not be ignored. It was Kishore Singh with whom deceased Prem Kanwar came from her parental house to her in-laws house on November 21, 1996 and she had met with an unnatural death under abnormal circumstances on November 24, 1996. 7. In view of what I have observed above, I find that impugned order of the learned court below is unjust and suffers from infirmity. 8. Resultantly, the revision stands allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned court of Additional Sessions Judge Sikar to evaluate entire material on record as directed hereinabove. The record of the case be sent back forthwith. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sikar on March 3, 1998. *******