HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6909 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. 2. Present application has been filed for the following main relief:- "Therefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the operation and implementation of the summoning order dated 03.01.2025 passed under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, in Complaint Case No. 23685 of 2023, Smt. Neelam Devi vs. Pawan Yadav & Others, as well as the Non-Bailable Warrant dated 24.06.2025, and for quashing the entire proceedings of the said complaint case pending before the Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich, contained as Annexure No.1 and 2 to the companying Affidavit, in the interest of justice." 3. On being confronted after taking note of facts of the present case, learned counsel for the applicant stated that present matter may be consigned to record with liberty to applicant to prefer an application in terms of Section 233 BNSS, akin to Section 210 CrPC, as also to take benefit of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender 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, by preferring appropriate application(s), which may be directed to be decided expeditiously. 4. Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vinay Kumar Tiwari, Raj Mani Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pavan Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty, as prayed for, and with a direction to the court concerned that if the applicant prefers appropriate application(s) seeking benefit of the judgment, referred above, and also file the application in terms of Section 233 BNSS, akin to Section 210 CrPC, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. 6. Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court 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 applicant apply for bail, whichever is earlier, they would not take any coercive action against the applicant in the aforesaid case. It is made clear that in this regard, no application shall be entertained. August 27, 2025 Vinay/- A482 No. 6909 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench