Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:123064 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28312 of 2014 Applicant :- Ram Veer Nandoi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sujan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Piyush Dubey Ajay Dubey Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Sujan Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Neelkant Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. None appears on behalf of opposite party no.2, although the name of Sri Piyush Dubey and Ajay Dubey is shown in the cause list as counsel for opposite party no.2. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing entire proceedings of Case Crime No.179 of 2012, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P.Act registered at P.S. Mahila Thana, Rakabganj, District Agra. 3. In the instant matter, an FIR was lodged by O.P. no.2 against the applicants on 25.12.2012 alleging that her marriage was solemnized with Vimal, (co-accused), however, the husband and other family members were not satisfied with the dowry given in marriage and started demanding more dowry, when the demand was not fulfilled, her husband, Vimal and the aplicant have dropped her to the maternal house. In the said matter, after investigation charge sheet was filed on 25.09.2013 and the summons were issued. The entire proceedings have been challenged in this application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is no demand of dowry against the applicant in the FIR and the name of the applicant was expunged by the Investigating Officer, however, further investigation was directed, thereafter, a supplementary charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant under Section 3/4 of D.P.Act. He further submits that there are general allegations levelled against the applicant. He also submits that this matter is covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam v. State of Bihar, (2022) 6 SCC 599 and Geeta Mehrotra & Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2012 (10) SCC 741 and the instant proceeding is nothing else but a pure abuse of process of law. Further submission is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the court below has utterly failed to consider that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that there was a matrimonial discord and the victim was beaten up in which she sustained four injuries according to medical report. He further submits that it is specifically stated in the FIR that the applicant happens to be brother-in-law of the victim and he was instrumental in the demand of dowry. He also submits that the specific allegation has been made against the applicant of dropping the victim at her parental house and demand of dowry. The victim has also named the applicant in the FIR and her statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the Court below has rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and peruse the record. 7. In this case there are specific allegations against the applicant in the FIR as well as the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., therefore, this matter is not covered by the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam (supra) and Geeta Mehrotra & Another (supra) because there were general allegations against the family members in these cases, while there are specific allegations against the applicant in this case and the veracity of these allegations can only be examined after adducing evidence in the trial. 8. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 25.7.2025 S.P. Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad