Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86168 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14703 of 2025 Applicant :- Mahendra And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar and Sri Sudir Kumar Chandraul, learned AGA for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the Criminal Complaint Case No. 3685 of 2023, Smt. Gomti versus Mahendra and others, Under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Pahari, District Chitrakoot, pending in the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, First, Chitrakoot and summoning order dated 27.2.2025 passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chitrakoot, in Criminal Complaint Case No. 3685 of 2023, Under Sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and 3/4 , Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Pahari, District Chitrakoot. 3. The case of the applicant is that the applicant no. 1 is the husband, applicant no. 2 is the father-in-law, applicant no. 3 is the mother-in-law, applicant No. 4 is devar and applicant no. 5 is unmarried Nanad, marriage of the applicant no. 1 stood solemnized with the opposite party no. 2 on 28.04.2018. As per the complaint, the opposite party no. 2 was subjected to maltreatment and administered beating and also abuses were being hurled to bring additional dowry and on 13.08.2021, the applicants herein joined together and thereafter took away the streedhan, gold, silver ornaments and committed marpeet and thrown away the opposite party no. 2 from the matrimonial house and the opposite party no. 2 accompanied with her child went to her maternal house. A complaint is also stated to have been lodged in writing before the Superintendent of Police and since nothing was done so proceedings under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was initiated. Thereafter, post recording of statement under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C., applicants have been summoned on 27.02.2025 under Section 498A, 323 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act. 4. Questioning the summoning order, the applicants have filed the present application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants had no point of time demanded any dowry less to say about subjecting the opposite party no. 2 to any maltreatment. Submission is that totally false and frivolous allegations have been sought to be levelled without any basis being a bundle of lies that dowry was being demanded and the opposite party no. 2 was divested of her legal right of enjoying and keeping the jewellaries and streedhan and thrown away from her matrimonial house. Submission is that omnibus allegations have been levelled. 6. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that the summoning order considers the complaints as well as the statement made under Section 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. and after, prima facie, being satisfied that the case is triable and not frivolous had summoned the applicants. 7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. 8. Apparently, in the complaint, the complainant alleges to be the wife of the applicant no. 1 and the applicants no. 2 and 5 are their in-laws. As per the allegation, the marriage was solemnized on 28.04.2018, however, constant demand of dowry was being made and she was subjected to maltreatment. On 13.08.2021, a specific pin pointed allegation have been levelled against the applicants for the demand of dowry on account of non-satisfactions of the same, the streedhan all the valuables were taken away and she was thrown away from her matrimonial house. So much so, the statement of the complainant-wife under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. also specifically pin points the allegations against the applicants reciting the date 13.08.2021. Further, the statement of Barelal, P.W. 1, Kalli Devi P.W. 2 also corroborates with the allegations contained in the complaint and there is no inconsistency or the variation in that regard. At the stage of summoning, the court below was not required to conduct a mini trial what was required was according of satisfaction that the case is triable and not frivolous. Once prima facie there appears to be no contradiction or variation then it would not be appropriate for this Court to throttle the proceedings at this stage, once summons have been issued. 9. Accordingly, no case is made out for interference in the present proceedings at the stage of summoning, the application is rejected leaving it open to the applicants to prefer appropriate proceedings before the court below for enlargement on bail, the same may be decided with most expedition in accordance with law of the land. Order Date :- 20.5.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad