JUDGMENT 1. - The instant revision petition has been filed on behalf of State of Rajasthan assailing the order dated 11.8.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, whereby, the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh has discharged the respondent from the offence under Section 304-B IPC and toned down the matter and sent the same to the learned CJM, Chittorgarh to try the case for the offence under Section 498A IPC. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that in this case, the deceased Laxmi contacted love marriage with the respondent Mushtaq Ahmed three years prior to her unnatural death. Since, the religions of both the parties were different, as such, the Society was against them. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the deceased gave birth to a male child and just three months thereafter she committed suicide in the matrimonial home by consuming poison. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that there is a specific allegation of the complainant in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the deceased was continuously harassed and treated with cruelty by the accused respondent right from the date of her marriage. It is further stated that the parents of the deceased were helpless in providing protection to her because the Society was against them. Learned Public Prosecutor further submits that there is a specific allegation of the first informant in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that he met the deceased on 14.3.2011 and on that day, the deceased told him that the respondent was frequently beating her after consuming liquor and that she was being forced to bring money from the first informant. She committed suicide on the very next day. Learned Public Prosecutor thus submits that there is ample evidence on the record to frame charge against the respondent for the offence under Section 304-B IPC and thus the learned trial court has committed a grave error in discharging the accused from the said offence. 3. Per contra, Shri Pradeep Shah learned counsel for the respondent submits that the deceased had entered into love marriage with the respondent and, therefore, there was no occasion for the respondent for having treated the deceased with cruelty in relation to demand of dowry. 3. Per contra, Shri Pradeep Shah learned counsel for the respondent submits that the deceased had entered into love marriage with the respondent and, therefore, there was no occasion for the respondent for having treated the deceased with cruelty in relation to demand of dowry. Learned counsel for the respondent thus prays that the order dated 11.8.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh discharging the respondent from the offence under Section 304-B IPC does not call for any interference by this Court. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned as well as the record. 5. From a perusal of the record, it is not in dispute that the deceased met with an unnatural death in her matrimonial home within a period of three years from her marriage. There is a specific allegation of the complainant in the FIR that the deceased was continuously treated with cruelty by the respondent right from the marriage. There is a specific allegation in the statement of the complainant (father of the deceased) that on 14.3.2011, he met the deceased and on that day, the deceased wept before him and complained that she was being beaten, harassed and humiliated continuously by the respondent and money was demanded from her for running the household. The father was helpless doing anything to help out the deceased as the Society had ostracised him because of the intercaste marriage of the respondent with the deceased. There is evidence on the record to show that the respondent Mushtaq Ahmed aged 35 years being the teacher of the deceased when she was an eighteen years' old girl enticed her and married with her. In such situation, it was all the more required of him to provide proper care and protection to his wife. On the contrary, the deceased, a young girl of 21 years on the date of her death was assaulted by the respondent continuously and was treated with cruelty. The cruelty did not stop even after the deceased gave birth to a child and within three months of the child being born, the deceased was pressurised by the respondent for bringing money from the father. The helpless father was unable to provide any assistance as the Society was against him. The cruelty did not stop even after the deceased gave birth to a child and within three months of the child being born, the deceased was pressurised by the respondent for bringing money from the father. The helpless father was unable to provide any assistance as the Society was against him. Thus, feeling cornered from all sides and due to the cruelty inflicted upon her, the deceased a young mother of 21 years was forced to end her life in her matrimonial home within seven years of her marriage. The presumptions under Sections 113A and 113B definitely operate against the respondent in view of these facts. 6. In this view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that at this stage, there was ample material evidence available on the record of the case to frame charge against the respondent for the offence under Section 304-B IPC. The trial court has committed grave error of law and facts in discharging the accused respondent from the said offence. 7. Resultantly, this revision petition is allowed. The order dated 11.8.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh discharging the accused respondent from the offence under Section 304-B IPC is hereby quashed. The case has been toned down and sent to the CJM, Chittorgarh for trial. He shall forthwith commit the case to the Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh where charge under Section 304-B IPC shall be framed against the accused and he shall be tried for the said offence along with the other offences without being prejudiced with the observations made in this order.Record be sent back forthwith.Revision allowed. *******