Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53938 Court No. - 76 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3580 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mrs. Archana Kumari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashish Tyagi,Kapil Tyagi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State-respondents, and perused the record. 2. The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 24.12.2024 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.3, Muzaffar Nagar in Criminal Revision No.292 of 2023 titled Smt. Archana Kumari v. State of U.P. and Others, whereby the order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Fast Track Court No.1, Muzaffar Nagar in Case No.3197/9 of 2022 titled State v. Ankit and Others, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Muzaffar Nagar, has been affirmed. 3. By the said order, the trial court rejected the petitioner's application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. seeking summoning of opposite party no.2 - Ankit Gautam (brother-in-law), opposite party no.3 - Shivani Sharma (married sister-in-law), opposite party no.4 - Manish Sharma (married brother-in-law), opposite party no.5 - Kripal Singh, and opposite party no.6 - Brahmapal Singh as additional accused persons. It was alleged by the petitioner that opposite parties nos.2 to 6 were not only instrumental in solemnizing the marriage but were also involved in acts of cruelty and unlawful demands for dowry. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the courts below have erred in rejecting the application without properly appreciating the material available on record. It was contended that the complainant, in his deposition before the trial court, has specifically named opposite parties nos.2 to 6, and their exoneration by the Investigating Officer was actuated by extraneous considerations. 5. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the petition, contending that the courts below have rightly rejected the application after due consideration of the material on record, and no case for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out. 6. Upon considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material available on record, this Court finds that the impugned orders suffer from no illegality, material irregularity, or perversity warranting interference in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is noted that opposite parties nos.2 to 6, being married brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant, were living separately from the complainant's matrimonial home, and there appears no credible material on record to establish their active involvement in the alleged demand for dowry or commission of cruelty. 7. It is well settled that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to summon additional accused is an extraordinary power which ought to be exercised sparingly and only when strong and cogent evidence comes to light during trial. 8. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that no ground for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution is made out. 9. The writ petition being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 I.A.Siddiqui Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad