HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1809 of 2025 Court No. - 13 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 graciously be pleased to quash the impugned summon order dated 15.09.2025 issued by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/J.M. Utraula, Balrampur in case no. 994/2025 in Case Crime No. 0043/2025, under Section U/s 115(2), 351(3) of BNS 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, at Ps Saidulla Nagar, District Balrampur against applicant/petitioner, contained as Annexure No.1 to the petition, and also the impugned charge-sheet dated 30.06.2025 filed in Case Crime No. 0043/2025, under Section U/s 115(2), 351(3) of BNS 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, at Ps Saidulla Nagar, District Balrampur against applicant/petitioner, contained as Annexure No.2 to the petition and entire criminal proceedings pending before learned trial court in pursuant to the F.I.R No. 0043/2025 lodged U/s 115(2), 351(3) of BNS 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, at Ps Saidulla Nagar, District Balrampur against applicant/petitioner, in the interest of justice. Such other orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the applicant/petitioner." 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Piyush Pathak, Om Prakash Prajapati Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mata Prasad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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. November 28, 2025 Vinay/- NA528 No. 1809 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench