HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1434 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s) and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present application has been preferred seeking following main relief(s):- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned summoning order dated 12.6.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Lalganj, Pratapgarh, as well as whole criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 626 of 2025 Under section 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, "Manju Devi Versus Anil Kumar Verma & others", related with Police Station- Lalganj, District- Pratapgarh, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Lalganj, Pratapgarh, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this petition." 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant(s) submitted that at this stage, he is confining his prayer to seek the benefit of the judgment(s) 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 for which liberty may be given to the applicant(s) and liberty may also be given to the applicant(s) to approach this Court again at appropriate stage for seeking appropriate relief. 4. Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant(s). 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for. 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, they would not take any coercive action against the applicant(s) in the aforesaid case. It is made clear that in this regard, no application shall be entertained. September 26, 2025 Anand/- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Lalji Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Ashoka Devi And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench