It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that opposite party no.2 is brother-in-law ( Bahnoi ) of the applicants. There is matrimonial dispute between the sister of applicants and opposite party no.2. Sister of the applicants, namely, Smt Suman Lata filed an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 24.12.2012 to lodged FIR under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act. In counter-blast opposite party no.2 moved an application under sections 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 01.01.2013 against the applicants which was treated as complaint and thereafter statement of complainant and witnesses have been recorded under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The applicants were summoned to face trial vide order dated 03.01.2013. In this case, the applicants appeared before the court concerned, they were granted bail vide order dated 12.07.2017. The case was listed for evidence under section 244 Cr.P.C., and due to non appearance of opposite party no.2, opportunity of evidence under section 244 Cr.P.C. was closed vide order dated 15.12.2017. On application, an opportunity was given to opposite party no.2 to produce evidence under section 244 Cr.P.C.thereafter the opposite party no.2 has not adduced any evidence and his adjournment application was allowed with cost. It has further been contended that present prosecution is instituted for the purpose of harassment. No offence is made out against the applicants.
