Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75071 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16119 of 2025 Applicant :- Yogendra Pandit And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Kumar Verma,Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav along with Sri Aditya Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri B.S. Kushwaha, learned AGA for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the summoning order dated 28.11.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 770 of 2024, Smt. Asha Sharma @ Asman Versus Yogendra Pandit and others, under Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District-Saharanpur pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)F.T.C. Saharanpur. (Crimes Against Women). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that proceedings stood lodged by the opposite party no. 2, wife against the applicant no. 1 husband , applicant no. 2, mother-in-law, applicant no. 3, Jeth, applicant no. 4, Jethani, under Sections 12, 18, 20, 22, 23 and 24 of the DV Act with an allegation that the opposite party no. 2 happens to be of different religion, post conversion, her marriage stood solemnized with the applicant no. 1 on 26.08.2004, however, the applicants are alleged to have maltreated the opposite party no. 2 and demanded an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- for the purchase of a property and she was thrown away from her matrimonial house three years back from the date of filing of the complaint and in respect to maintenance, proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has also been initiated and when the opposite party no. 2 was living all alone after being thrown away from her matrimonial house then the applicants no. 1 & 2 came in the bike and the hurled abuses, administered threats and committed acts which was totally uncalled for. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 28.11.2024, notices have been issued to the applicants. 4. Questioning the entire proceedings including the complaint and the order dated 28.11.2024, the applicants have field the present application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that totally false and frivolous allegations have been sought to be levelled without any basis as proceedings are being sought to be initiated by the opposite party no. 2 at different forums just in order to entangle the entire family. Submission is that proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. was initiated in which on 03.11.2023, an order was passed for maintenance and the applicant no. 1 therein had preferred proceedings under Section 127 which is stated to be pending. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that even from the wedlock of the applicant no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 a daughter was born who has also lodged criminal proceedings, wherein a clear picture would emerge regarding the activities of the opposite party no. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that once the opposite party no. 2 had left the matrimonial house three years ago from the date of filing of the complaint, then the complaint would not be maintainable as there is no question of share household and further according to him, the allegations are vague and not specific. 6. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that the proceedings are maintenance in view of the provisions contained under Section 2(f) of the DV Act which itself points the domestic relationship means a relationship between two persons who live or have at any point of time live is crucial and thus, merely because three years prior to lodging of the complaint, the opposite party no. 2 has left, it would not take our right to avail the remedies under the Act. 7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bard and perused the record carefully. 8. Apparently, proceedings stood lodged by the opposite party no. 2 as indicated above on 28.11.2024 against the applicants herein. There are pin pointed allegations against the applicants in various paragraph regarding non-grant of maintenance administrating of beating hurling of abuses and also maltreatment and harassment. Once the said allegations are already there then this Court ordinarily would not interfere in the matter of routine particularly when only notices have been issued to the applicant. The issue as to whether there is any truth or veracity in the complaint is a matter of trial. 9. In the opinion of the Court, it is always open for the applicants to appear before the court below, submit their response and contest the proceedings and if an order is passed under Chpater IV of the 2005 Act then the same can be availed by virtue of a remedy under Section 29. Even otherwise the Court does not find that, prima facie, the case is not liable to be proceeded with as it would be travesty of justice at this juncture to throttle the investigation. However, it is left open for the applicant to contest the proceedings taking all legal and factual grounds which are available under law and the courts has no reasons to disbelieve that the same shall be decided in correct perspective. 10. In view of the above, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad