Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133355 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 28289 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd Nazir And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajeev Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Kumar Rai, learned State Law Officer for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned summoning order dated 24.01.2025, passed by the court of Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C. Mahila, Azamgarh, in Complaint Case No. 1934 of 2023 (Nazia Bano Versus Mohd. Nazir and others) under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act P.S. Saraimeer, District- Azamgarh. 3. The case of the applicant is that the applicants are husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law of the opposite party no. 2, marriage of the opposite party no. 2 stood solemnized with the applicant no. 1 on 15.05.2022. A proceedings under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. came to be preferred on 14.06.2023 by the opposite party no. 2 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act with an allegation that at the time of the marriage cash of Rs. 2,00,000/- and gifts to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- were offered, however, the applicants herein being the in-laws of the opposite party no. 2 was not satisfied as they had anticipation more which was in the shape of a four wheeler car and on account of non fulfillment of the said desire, the opposite party no. 2 was subjected to assault and harassment and maltreatment. It is alleged in the complaint that on 05.06.2023 at about 7:00 in the morning, the applicants herein acted as a gang and thereafter assaulted the opposite party no. 2 on the premise that an expectation for getting a swift car as a gift was not accomplished and the opposite party no. 2 was thrown away from her matrimonial house and on 06.06.2023, the opposite party no. 2 was subjected to medical examination wherein injuries were found and post lodging of a written complaint on 09.06.2023 before the SSP, Azamgarh when no FIR was lodged then in view of the complaint came to be preferred. After recording of the statements under Section 200 of the complainant, Section 202 of Zubair Ahmad, Sant Lal, the applicant came to be summoned under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the DP Act on 24.01.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained even for a single moment particularly in view of the fact that the present complaint is nothing but a grossest misuse of process of law particularly when it is an act of retaliation and counter blast as the applicants herein on 15.12.2022 had lodged a complaint with respect to the incident dated 28.11.2022 against the opposite party no. 2 and their family members under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427, 452, 392 IPC and summoning order came to be passed on 16.10.2023 against the family members of opposite party no. 2 under Section 504 IPC. Submission is that it is the opposite party no. 2 who is facing the problems and just in order to exert pressure and to dictate terms, the present proceedings have been lodged so as to post the applicants who enter into compromise. Further submission is that even assuming that any injury has been sustained then too these injuries are not such which would in any manner whatsoever show any criminality. It is also contended that though in the complaint, it is alleged that the opposite party no. 2 sustained injuries on 05.06.2023 but in her statement under Section 200 there is no recital about the date on which she was injured. He, thus, submits that the summoning order has been passed on mere asking without acknowledging any prima facie satisfaction about the application/attraction of the penal sections. He, however, submits that the applicants shall be filing their discharge application. 4. Learned State Law Officer, on the other hand, submits that whatever might be once there are no material contradictions or variations in the statements under Section 200 read with Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. vis-a-vis the complaint and the nature of the allegations in the complaint coupled with the injuries, the case becomes triable, however, he has no objection to the suggestion of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant shall be filing discharge application. 5. Having heard the submission so made across the bar and perusing the record, bearing in mind the nature of the allegations as well as the other relevant factors without going into the merits of the case, the present application is disposed of granting liberty to the applicant to prefer discharge application by 27.08.2025. On the said motion the court below shall decide the discharge application with most expedition. 6. Till the disposal of the discharge application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant summoning order dated 24.01.2025, passed by the court of Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C. Mahila, Azamgarh, in Complaint Case No. 1934 of 2023 (Nazia Bano Versus Mohd. Nazir and others) under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act P.S. Saraimeer, District- Azamgarh. 7. The protection so accorded to the applicants shall be only in those contingencies wherein the applicants sticks to the timelines and does not violate any of the conditions of the order. In case of any violation, the protection stand vacated without reference to the Bench. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad