accused persons (revisionists) were not satisfied with the said dowry, therefore, they started harassing her. There was consistent demand of additional dowry of one four wheeler vehicle and an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- and when her father expressed his inability to fulfill their demand, they started her mental and physical harassment. At last, complainant also made allegation that on 15.07.2022, she along with her handicapped son aged about 11 years were thrown out of her matrimonial home after being beaten up in the clothes they were wearing. This Court is of the view that the appreciation of evidence is a function of the trial court at the appropriate stage. It is crystallized judicial view that at the stage of discharge, the Court is to examine the materials only with a view to be satisfied that prima facie case of commission of offence alleged has been made out against the accused person. At the stage of framing charge, the court has to prima facie consider whether there is sufficient ground for proceedings against the accused. It has also been settled that charges can also be framed on the basis of strong suspicion. If there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed the offence, the Court can justifiably say that prima facie case exists against the accused. Marshaling and appreciation of evidence is not in the domain of the trial court at the time of considering discharge application. The broad test to be applied is whether the materials on record, if unrebutted makes a conviction reasonably possible. The final test of guilt is not to be applied at that stage.
