HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9891 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application is filed with the prayer to quash the proceedings of Case No.1680 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No.265 of 2022 under Sections 498-A, 323, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Ahirauli, District Ambedkar Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that general allegations have been levelled against the applicant as applicants are parent-in- laws. He further relies on the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. reported in 2012 10 SCC 741, Rajesh Chaddha Vs. State of U.P. passed in S.L.P. (Cr.) No.2353-2354 of 2019 and Dara Lakshmi Narayana & Ors. Vs. State of Telangana & Anr. reported in (2025) 3 SCC 735 and submits that in the present era there is a tendency of implicating all the in-laws and merely on the basis of general allegations the in-laws cannot be dragged in the prosecution case, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicants and submits that charge sheet dated 8.1.2023 and thereafter, cognizance was taken by the court below and after framing of charge, trial was Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : P.K. Mishra, Tarun Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shiv Poojan @ Shiv Poojan Tripathi And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) proceeded and statements of P.W.1 & 2 has already been examined. He further submits that witnesses in their deposition supported the prosecution version, therefore, judgments relies by the learned counsel for the applicant is not applicable in the present case. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of the application as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that after collecting sufficient evidences against the applicants, charge sheet dated 8.1.2023 was filed by the Investigating Officer and thereafter, charge were framed, which was never challenged by the applicant, there all the evidences of the applicants can be considered before the trial court. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that present applicant is misconceived and same is hereby dismissed. December 17, 2025 GauraV/- A482 No. 9891 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench