Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106297 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22535 of 2025 Applicant :- Chhotelal Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ritesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Ritesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri R.K. Ojha, learned State Law Officer for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants to quash the impugned summoning order dated 06.05.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.- II (Crime Against Women), Ballia in Case No.5339/2022 (Smt. Khushbu Singh vs. Siddharth Singh Rajput and others) under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Gadwar, District Ballia. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are father-in-law, mother-in-law, Jeth and Jethani. The marriage of the opposite party no. 2 stood solemnized with Siddharth Singh who is the son of applicant nos. 1 and 2 on 25.11.2015. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the entire allegations sought to be levelled, pursuant whereto the applicants have been summoned under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act is nothing but a bundle of lies, particularly, for the simple reasons that the applicants had no point of time demanded any dowry. It is further contended that the opposite party no.2 and the son of the applicant nos. 1 and 2 are mostly intoxicating stage, pursuant whereto they keep on fighting with each other on account whereof the offspring of the opposite party no.2 and son of the applicant nos. 1 and 2 interest is being jeopardized. It is further contended that even complaints have also been lodged under IGRS portal pursuant whereto report also came wherein the said fact was substantiated. He further submits that so far as the allegations referable to the incident dated 26.11.2015 and 02.09.2022 with regard to assault is concerned, the same is false, there is no medical report available and the court below on the basis of the tailor-made statement under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. complainant and under Section 202 Cr.P.C. of the Meena Singh, Parmatma Singh, the applicants have been summoned under the above noted sections. 4. Learned State Law Officer submits that whatever might be at the stage of summoning what would be relevant would be the allegations contained in the complaint vis-a-vis the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., according to him, there happens to be allegations which do not in any manner whatsoever indicate even for a moment that the case is not triable. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully. 6. Apparently, the applicants herein are in-laws being father-in- law, mother-in-law, Jeth and Jethani. The issue as to whether there is any veracity to the allegations contained in the complaint is a subject matter of trial which cannot be gone into at this stage. Furthermore, the Court at this stage is only concerned with the statements made under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. read with the allegations made in the complaint. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants has made a statement at bar that as per the instructions received from his client, the applicants shall be filing discharge application. 8. In the opinion of the Court, it is always for the applicants to prefer a discharge application before the court below taking all the grounds that the son of the applicants and the daughter-in-law, opposite party no. 2 keep on fighting each other and due to their fight, the applicants have been made a scapegoat and they have no point of time either assaulted or demanded any dowry. They may also claim benefit of the law laid down in the case of Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2012 (10) ADJ 464. 9. Looking into the overall facts of the case, the application is disposed of directing the applicants to submit a discharge application by 08.08.2025 and on the said motion, the court below shall decide the discharge application with most expedition. 10. Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action is being taken against the applicants in pursuance of the impugned summoning order dated 06.05.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.-II (Crime Against Women), Ballia in Case No.5339/2022 (Smt. Khushbu Singh vs. Siddharth Singh Rajput and others) under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Gadwar, District Ballia. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 A. Prajapati Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad