Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59861 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 477 of 2025 Applicant :- Savitri Devi And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Kori,Virendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Kori, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Sudhir Kumar Chandraul, learned AGA for the State. 2. This application u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 24.05.2023 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ F.T.C. (Crimes against Women), Court No. 15, Bhadohi at Gyanpur as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 3508 of 2022 (Sarita Versus Dashrath and others) under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ F.T.C. (Crimes against Women), Court No. 15, Bhadohi at Gyanpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant no. 1 is the mother-in-law, applicant no. 2 is the father- in-law, applicants no. 3 and 4 are the brothers-in-law, applicants no. 5 and 6 are sisters-in-law. The marriage of the opposite party no. 2 stood solemnized with the son of the applicants no. 1 and 2, Dashrath on 07.05.2018. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that totally false and frivolous allegations have been sought to be levelled that too omnibus against the applicants particularly when there was no question of demand of any dowry and further so far as the allegation relatable to the incident occurred on 10.08.2019 is concerned, the same is false and frivolous, no such offence has been committed. He submits that an exaggerated and concocted story is being planted just in order to rope in the applicants. 4. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that from the nature of the allegations contained in the complaint as well as the statements under Section 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. itself show that it cannot be ruled out that, prima facie, commission of offences have not been made out. 5. I have heard the submissions made across the bar and perused the record. 6. The sole question which arises for determination is the extent of judicial intervention in the present proceedings at this stage. Apparently, a complaint stood lodged against the applicants including the husband relatable to the commission of offences on 10.08.2019 wherein maltreatment and atrocities were being inflicted upon the opposite party no. 2, wife on account whereof, the opposite party no. 2 was occasioned with miscarriage. Allegations contained in the complaint as well as the statements under Section 200 & 202 of Cr.P.C. are not in variance and rather in conformity and in consonance with. A specific pin-pointed allegations have been made against the applicants who have been also named separately in the complaint. Though the learned counsel for the applicant might be right while contending that mere mentioning of the name in the complaint and marking them as accused would not invite penal consequences but here there is a slight difference that pin pointed allegations are there. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Aluri Venkata Ramana Vs. Aluri Thirupathi Rao & Ors.: SLP(Crl.) No. 9243 of 2024 has also interpreted the provisions of Section 498A IPC wherein criminality was in relation to offences under Section 498A. Here, since there happens to be allegations against the applicants regarding commission of offences, thus, no relief whatsoever can be accorded to the applicants. 7. Accordingly, the Court finds that there is no justifiable ground to throttle the investigation at this stage . Accordingly, interference is declined, application is rejected. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants seeks direction for consideration of his bail application in light of the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; decided on 07.10.2021 in S.L.P. No.5191 of 2021 9. In the opinion of the Court, once a bail application is preferred then the same shall be considered with most expeditions strictly as per the law of the land without any delay. Order Date :- 22.4.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad