HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2953 of 2022 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ashish Raman Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2. 2. The petitioner herein have mainly prayed for quashing/setting aside of the entire proceedings of the Complaint Case No. 3022/2019, Durga Prasad v. Preeti Jaiswal and ors., under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506, I.P.C., P.S. Visheshwarganj, District Bahraich, including summoning order dated 26/04/2022 passed by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M.-9, District Bahraich, contained as annexure Nos. 1 and 2 to the instant application. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the Applicant No. 1 is wife of opposite party No. 2. She has lodged F.I.R. against the opposite party No. 2 and his family members under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act, at P.S. Mahila Thana, District Faizabad (now Ayodhya), on 20.06.2018. She has also filed the maintenance application before the competent court against opposite party No. 2 on 04.09.2019. The opposite party No. 2 (husband) has also lodged an F.I.R. at P.S. Karnailganj, District Gonda, against the applicant No. 1 (wife) and her family members on 19.07.2018 under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., however, final report has been submitted in this F.I.R. The opposite party No. 2 has challenged Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raghvendra Ojha, Vyas Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ashish Raman Mishra Preeti Jaiswal And Ors. .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Add. Chief Secrety. Deptt. Home Govt. U.P. Civil Secrett. Lucknow And Anr. .....Opposite Party(s) the said final report before the revisional court, which is still pending. However, the opposite party No. 2 again filed application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 16.10.2019 levelling the allegations that the applicant no. 1 and her family members have looted certain articles and had also beaten him and his family members, which has been treated as complaint- case, in question. 4. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel that though earlier the F.I.R. was lodged by the opposite party No. 2 and the investigation therein was done and final report was submitted, again he has filed application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 16.10.2019 levelling the same allegations against the applicant no.1 (wife) and her family members in the present complaint case, so that under the coercion compromise may take place. It has been also submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the entire proceeding instituted by the opposite party No. 2 by way of complaint in question is malicious and just to settle his personal score. 5. In support of his contentions learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon Judgments of Hon'be the Supreme Court in the cases of- (1) State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Suppl. (1) SCC 335), Para 102 Point 7; (2) The Commissioner of Police & ors. v. Devender Anand & ors., Criminal Appeal No. 834 of 2017, dated 08.08.2019 (Para-4); and (3) Anukul Singh v. State of U.P., AIR 2025 SC 4567 (para nos. 17, 18, 19). 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has submitted that bare perusal of the complaint as well as statements under Sections 200 and 202, Cr.P.C. offence is made out, therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed. 7. After going through the records, I find that many matrimonial cases are pending between the Applicant No. 1 and opposite party No. 2, i.e. proceedings under Section 125, Cr.P.C., the case under Dowry Prohibition Act and case under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act. It is also to be noted that all the aforesaid cases were instituted prior to the present complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The fact is also very important to A482 No. 2953 of 2022 2 be noted that earlier the opposite party No. 2 had lodged F.I.R. under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., and final report has been filed by the Police, which is under challenge before the revisional court. It appears that the opposite party No. 2 has again instituted complaint in question by way of application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., which prima facie appears to be malicious. 8. After going through the record, prima facie the proceedings instituted by the opposite party No. 2 by way of application under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C., which has been treated as the complainant, in question, appears to be based on malice and the complaint appears to have been filed just to settle the personal score. The application is accordingly allowed. Complaint Case No. 3022/2019, Durga Prasad v. Preeti Jaiswal and ors., under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506, I.P.C., P.S. Visheshwarganj, District Bahraich, including summoning order dated 26/04/2022 passed by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M.-9, District Bahraich, in the said case, contained as annexure Nos. 1 and 2 to the instant application, is hereby quashed. November 18, 2025 A.Nigam A482 No. 2953 of 2022 3 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench