Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110376 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No. 3) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44728 of 2024 Applicant :- Phoolchandra And 14 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Samya Lal Pandey,Vidya Kant Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Vidya Kant Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vijay Rathi, learned A.G.A for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 143 of 2023 (Anita Chaurasia vs. Phoolchandra and others) under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.-Handia, District-Prayagraj pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Prayagraj as well as the summoning order dated 4.4.2024. 3. The opposite party no. 2 had filed a complaint case on 5.12.2023 alleging that one Manish, son of the applicant no. 1 had sexually exploited her on the pretext of marriage. In connection with the same, when the opposite party no. 2 went to the house of applicants, they had abused and beaten her, for which the instant complaint has been filed by the opposite party no. 2. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the said Manish, son of applicant no. 1 is missing since more than four years. With regard to same, a Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 1 of 2025 was filed through the applicants. The same was disposed of vide order dated 6.2.2025 with a direction to avail the other remedies. In view of the same, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in the habeas corpus petition, the stand of the opposite party no. 2 was that earlier the said Manish had married her and later on he has deserted her and left to unknown place without leaving any information. In view of the aforesaid fact, learned counsel for the applicants seeks quashing of the entire proceedings of the instant case against the applicants. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that the allegations in the complaint are supported by the statement of witnesses under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.. So far as the submission that the son of the applicant was missing for four years is unbelievable as no action was taken by them for four years. It is only after the applicants were summoned in the complaint case and after filing the instant petition, the habeas corpus petition was filed in the year 2025. Thus, the story of missing of son of the applicant is prima facie not reliable and proceedings of the instant case cannot be quashed on the basis of said statement. In view thereof, he seeks dismissal of the instant application. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the records of the case. 7. From the record, it is noted that since the allegations made in the complaint case are supported by statement of witnesses under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. and the trial court having found a prima facie case has summoned the applicants herein. Had the son of the applicant no. 1 was missing as alleged for four years, at least they have taken some steps to find his whereabouts; no missing complaint was lodged by the applicants for more than four years. Therefore, the story of missing of son of applicant no. 1 cannot be relied upon at this stage. However, that is the subject matter of investigation in the appropriate proceedings as has been permitted by this Court in habeas corpus petition. 8. For reasons aforesaid, this Court do not find any illegality in the summoning order. The application is devoid of merit and is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Kirti (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.) Digitally signed by :- SMT KIRTI MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad