Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79804 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6296 of 2025 Applicant :- Astafa Husain And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani,Rohit Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani, learned counsel for the applicants, who are 7 in number and Sri Moti Lal, learned A.G.A. for the State 2. In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued. 3. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 9.10.2024 of the Complaint Case No 144338 of 2023 (State Vs Astafa Husain and others), U/S 498A, 323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act P.S Kidwai Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar, pending before Add. Civil Judge (CD) Room No.06 Kanpur Nagar.. 4. The case set forth by the complainant before the court below was that a complaint was lodged by O.P. No.2/wife against the applicants, who are 7 in number, husband, mother-in-law, brother- in-law, Nandoi and sister-in-law, with an allegation that though the marriage of the applicant no.1 stood solemnized with O.P. No.2 on 02.08.2021, but dowry was being demanded on account whereof not only maltreatment was done, but also beating was administered along with threatening. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that now, the applicants have been summoned by the Court of Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Court No.6, Kanpur Nagar in Complaint Case No.14438 of 2023, Zeenat Begum vs. Astafa Hussain and others under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act on 09.10.2024. 5. Questioning the summoning order, present application has been filed. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained, even for a single moment. Elaborating the said submission, it is submitted that the complainant/Zeenat Begum has deposed and her statement was recorded under Section 200 of CrPC, and while inviting attention towards Annexure-4, page-32 of the paper-book, reference whereof has been made in paragraph-8 of the application, it is contended that the statement under Section 202 CrPC was recorded of one Tasneem followed by the statement of Lal Bahadur, which is at page-36 of the paper-book, but in the summoning order the statements of PW-1 Babli Devi and PW-2 Ram Sewak has been recorded. Submission is that on the basis of the statement of some other witnesses in other case, the applicant has been summoned. He submits that the summoning order suffers from manifest error of law. He has also made a statement at Bar that Babli Devi and Ram Sewak are nowhere connected with the present case and there is no question of recording of their statement. 7. Sri Moti Lal, learned A.G.A. on the other hand submitted that though the certified copy of the orders statements, which have been annexed with the application, it appears that Tasneem and Lal Bahadur has been the witnesses under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC being PW-1 and PW-2, however, due to typographical error, the reference has been made of PW-1 Babli Devi and PW-2 Ram Sewak, who do not appear to have been the witnesses in the said case. 8. I have heard the submissions so made across the Bar and perused the record carefully. 9. Though, ordinarily, the Court in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction does not in a routine manner interfere with the summoning order, however, there are certain exceptions, particularly, when summoning order is based upon a statement, which is nowhere associated or linked with it. In the present case, the Court finds that as per the certified copy of the statements of P.W-1 and P.W.-2, it is apparent that the same is of Tasneem or Lal Bahadur, however, the summoning order recites and proceeds to consider the statement of PW-1 Babli Devi and PW-2 Ram Sewak, who even in fact apparently are not appearing to be the witnesses in the said case. Since the said defect goes to the root of the matter, which would completely erode the proceedings, thus in the interest of justice, this Court proceeds to interfere with the summoning order dated 09.10.2024. According summoning order dated 09.10.2024 passed in Complaint Case no. 144338 of 2023, Zeenat Begum vs. Astafa Hussain and others, is set aside. 10. Matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law for facilitating motion. The certified copy of the shall be submitted by the court below by 30.05.2025. 11. In view of above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 15.5.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad