Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106663 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21373 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Savitri Devi and another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Applicant :- Janardan Prasad Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri J.P. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vikas Sharma, State Law Officer for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the entire proceeding of complaint case No. 2009 of 2023 ( Radha VS. Awadesh & others) u/s 498A, 323, 504,506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Delhi gate, pending in the court of Learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.2 Aligarh, as well as summoning order dated 19.12.2023 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate court No.3, Aligarh may also be quashed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that a complaint was lodged by the opposite party no. 2 against the applicants who happen to be the mother-in-law and jeth with an allegation that on 07.12.2020 the marriage of the son of the applicant no. 1 (Awadesh) stood solemnized with the opposite party no. 2. Allegation is that in the marriage itself huge amount of gifts and expenditure were made and the sister of the opposite party no. 2 was married to the elder brother of the husband of the applicant. It is also alleged that constant demand of dowry was being sought to be made and the opposite party no. 2 was subjected to assault, maltreatment and bad behaviour and when she had apprised the said fact to her parents then the same was complained but nothing was on the better side, however, on 12.08.2022, the opposite party no. 2 was thrown out of her matrimonial house. The opposite party no. 2, when she went to her parents' house then she narrated the entire incident and also apprise that due to non-satisfaction of the demand, her life was in danger. It is also alleged that the mother-in-law and the jeth were instrumental and rather they also indulged in assault. Complaint was lodged before the Station House Officer on 02.02.2023 followed by a registered letter on 06.02.2023 to the SSP and the complaint. Post recording of the statement of the opposite party no. 2 under Section 200 Guddi Devi, Chandra Pal under Section 202 the applicant was summoned on 19.12.2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act. 4. Questioning the summoning order, the present application has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants happen to be the mother-in-law and the jeth, they had at no point of time committed any offence there is no question of demand of dowry. Whatever allegations have been levelled, they are false and incorrect, they have no basis. It is further contended that, at best, the said allegations can be against the husband of the opposite party no. 2 and not the applicant, none of the ingredients under Section 498A of the IPC stands attracted, less to say about assault as there is no medical report available on record. It is also contended that there are no specific allegations assigning any role to the applicants, however, only general allegations have been levelled and further the nature of injuries are also not mentioned and the details of the demands sought to be raised, the date and time are not being reflected. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that even already the opposite party no. 2 has lodged proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. against the husband. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants shall be filing a discharge application for seeking discharge as none of the offences are made out in the light of the judgment in Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2012 (10) ADJ 464. 6. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that what is to be seen at the stage of summoning is the nature of the allegations in the complaint vis-a-vis the statements under Sections 200 and 202, in case, there are no material contradictions which goes to the root of the matter then the case becomes triable. He, however, submits that applicants can always prefer a discharge application seeking discharge. 7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. 8. In a proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 BNSS, this Court is not required to go into the merits of the allegations at the stage of summoning particularly in absence of pointing out of jurisdictional error. It is always open for the applicants as stated by them that they be accorded liberty to raise all the legal and factual grounds as permissible under law for discharge from the said offences. 9. Accordingly without going into the merits of the matter, the present application stands disposed of. 10. Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Complaint Case No. 2009 of 2023 (Radha vs. Awadesh & others) u/s 498A, 323,504,506 I.P.C. & Section D.P.Act, P.S. Delhi Gate, pending in the court of learned Judicial Miagistrate court No.2 Aligarh, summoning order dated 19.12.2023 passed by Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate court No.3, Aligarh. 11. Interim protection so accorded today, shall only be available to the application in those contingencies wherein, applicants stick to the timeline and does not commit any default to the order passed by this Court. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad