Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30186 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3945 of 2025 Applicant :- Jamuna Yadav And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./ Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu S. Tripathi,Prashant Kumar Singh,Raghav Bansal,Ritwika Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Heard. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C/528 B.N.S.S has been preferred with following main prayer:- " To quash the entire proceedings and consequential proceedings of Criminal Case No. 14507/2024 (State of U.P v. Umesh Yadav and Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 37/2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No.48; (ii) To quash the impugned summoning order, dated 01.03.2023, passed in Criminal Case No. 14507/2024 (State of U.P v. Umesh Yadav and Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 37/2022, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki, whereby the Applicants have been summoned as accused to stand trial under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; (iii) To quash the impugned Charge-Sheet bearing no.34/22, dated 18.09.2022, arising out of Case Crime No.37/2022, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the Applicants. (iv) To stay the operation and implementation of the impugned summoning order, dated 01.03.2023, passed in Criminal Case No. 14507/2024 (State of U.P v. Umesh Yadav and Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 37/2022, under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IP C and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki, whereby the Applicants have been summoned as accused to stand trial under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 during the pendency of the present application." Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the present case and have never ever demanded any dowry or harassed the respondent no. 2. It is further submitted that the respondent no. 2 has lodged the present FIR with vague and omnibus allegations just to pressurize the applicants for fulfilling her unjust demands. On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that earlier also on 28.07.2022, the husband of the complainant at Mahlia Thana had given assurance that on reaching home he will provide clothes and food to the respondent no. 2 but on reaching home all the applicants again beaten the complainant and hit her head on the wall so the allegations levelled in the FIR are specific, thus, no interference is called for by this Court. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicants to file bail application before the trial court which may be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116 as also to prefer a discharge application before the court below and the same may be decided expeditiously. Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 BNSS is disposed of with liberty as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the applicants apply for bail before the Court concerned, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Liberty is also granted to the applicants to move discharge application before the court below and the same shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no any other legal impediment. Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (Supra), this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, they would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Ashish Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench