Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82103 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 15409 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd Kaif @ Zair Husain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 10 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ahmad Saeed,M. Asif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as BNSS) has been preferred against summoning order dated 19.03.2025, passed by the A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Fatehpur in Complaint Case No.18531 of 2023 (Mohd Kaif @ Zair Husain Vs. Chand Miyan and Others), under Section 323 I.P.C., Police Station- Sultanpur Ghosh, District- Fatehpur, pending before the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No.2, Fatehpur. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has lodged complaint against opposite party nos.2 to 11 making allegations that on 22.04.2023 they have forcibly taken away jewellery, cash of Rs.48,000/- and various household articles from the house of complainant. The complainant has supported that version in his statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The witnesses examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. have also supported that version. It was stated that only opposite party no.7, who is wife of applicant, has been summoned under Section 323 IPC. Other named accused persons have not been summoned. It was submitted that a prima-facie case of house trespass and dacoity was made out and thus the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no material illegality or perversity in the impugned order. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. It is well settled that at the stage of issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate is mainly concerned with the allegations made in the complaint and evidence led in support of the same. The Magistrate has to be satisfied that there are sufficient grounds for proceedings against the accused. The issuance of process should not be mechanical, rather it must be based on the allegations made in the complaint and evidence led in support of the same. Though, at the stage of issuance of process to the accused the Magistrate is not required to record detailed order but Magistrate has to be prima-facie satisfied that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against accused. 7. In the instant matter, it appears from record that applicant is husband of opposite party no.7. The impugned complaint was lodged by the applicant against his wife as well as 10 other persons, who are family members and relatives of opposite party no.7. Only general and vague allegations have been made that all the 11 accused persons, including wife of applicant, have committed robbery at the house of complainant. No specific role has been assigned to any of the private opposite parties. It appears that essentially the matter relates to matrimonial discord and the impugned complaint was lodged to settle score in matrimonial dispute. The allegations levelled by applicant are quite absurd and improbable. In view of these facts and circumstances, it can not be said that a prima-facie case under Sections 452, 395 IPC is made out. It can also not be said that learned Magistrate has committed any error by not summoning the opposite party nos.2 to 6 and 8 to 11. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merits and thus, liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad