Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1468 of 2025 Applicant :- Chandan Yadav Alias Chandan Lal Bahadur Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav,Rituraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rituraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA for the State/opposite party no.1. 2. This application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the Complaint Case No.373 of 2023, Registration No.18907 of 2023, (Akanksha Yadav Vs. Chandan Yadav and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Shahgunj, District Jaunpur pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 5th Jaunpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant No.1 is the husband, applicant no.2 is the father-in-law and applicant no.3 is the mother-in-law and the marriage of the applicant on. 1 stood solemnized with the opposite party no.2 on 30.11.2020. 4. As per the allegations in the complaint dated 14.07.2023, it is alleged that a gift of more than Rs.3 lakhs was offered by the parents of the opposite party no.2 to the applicants but a further demand of Rs.2 lakhs stood raised and on account of non-payment of the same threats were being administered for killing the opposite party no. 2. It is alleged that on 19.03.2023, which was a Sunday, at 10 o'clock in the morning, the husband of the opposite party no.2, applicant no.1, father-in-law applicant no.2, mother-in- law, applicant no.3 along with Jethani had maltreated the opposite party no.2 and demanded an amount of Rs.2 lakhs and when inability was shown to make the said payment, then with the aid of fist and legs beating were administered and abuses were hurled and the opposite party no.2 was forcefully put in a four-wheeler and thrown away near the Dadulpur, Shahganj, Jaunpur, while threatening that now the opposite party no.2 should not come to the matrimonial house. 5. Statement under Section 200 of the CrP.C. was recorded of the complainant in which pinpointed allegations have been made against the applicants followed by the statement under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. of Dinesh Kumar, who has also made pinpointed allegations against the applicants. Statement under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. was also recorded of Rohit Kumar, who also supported the prosecution case and the court below vide order dated 11.06.2024 summoned the applicants under Sections 498A, 323, 406, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act. 6. Questioning the summoning order, the applicants have filed the present application. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that totally false and frivolous allegations have been levelled which are no basis at all. Submission is that there was no demand of dowry made and there is no question of maltreating or hurling abuses less to say about beating the opposite party no.2. 8. Contention is that the opposite party no.2 has not sustained any injury as there is no injury report and the court below have summoned as a matter of routine on mere asking without due application of mind. It is thus prayed that the summoning order be set aside. 9. Learned AGA on the other hand has supported the summoning order and according to him the summoning order has been passed after considering the statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. as well as the complaint lodged by the opposite party no.2. 10. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record. Apparently, at this stage, the Court is confronted with a challenge beings raised at the instance of the applicants to the summoning order. There are certain broad parameters which needs to be noticed in order to determine as to whether summoning order suffers from infirmity or not. One of the criteria of making scrutiny of a summoning order is the allegations in complaint vis-a-vis the statement under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. In case the prima facie offence is made out from the statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. and the complaint, then the case becomes triable. 11. Here in the present case, the Court finds that pinpointed allegations have been levelled by the opposite party no.2 against the husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, who are the applicants three in number. Not only the additional demand of dowry of a quantified amount to the tune of Rs.2 lakhs has been made but also incident which occurred on 19.03.2023 has also been indicated in the complaint. 12. Once the case of the prosecution stands supported by the statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. and the Magistrate has summoned the applicants while considering the statements as well as the complaint while recording satisfaction that the case is triable as prima facie offences have been committed then in these circumstances, it would not be appropriate for this Court to throttle the investigation. 13. Needless to point out that the learned counsel for the applicants has not indicated that there has been any judicial informality in the order and further, looking into the overall facts and situation, bearing in mind the nature of the allegations contained in the complaint so supported in the statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C. this court does not find the present case to be a fit case for interference. 14. Accordingly, the application stands rejected. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad