Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144420 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30928 of 2025 Applicant :- Vakar Ahmad And 8 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad Saran Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Saharad Saran Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri K.K. Vishwakarma, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicants for quashing the summoning order dated 27.06.2025 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi and entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case no. 457 of 2024 (Arjuman Jahan Vs. Vakar Ahmad and others), under section 85 B.N.S. and 4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Sarai Akil, District-Kaushambi, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants are husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in- law, unmarried nanad, married nanad and nandoi. Marriage of the applicant no.1 stood solemnized with O.P. No.2 on 24.05.2022. The allegation is that proceedings under Section 173(4) of CrPC came to be lodged by the O.P. no.2 on 19.09.2024 against the applicants. The allegation is that at the time of marriage, a huge expenditure worth Rs.5,00,000/- was incurred and a Swift Dzire and other valuable items and gifts were also offered, but the applicants were not happy with the same and they demanded more dowry. They kept on maltreating the O.P. No.2 and also assaulted her and the allegation against the applicant no.2 who happens to be father-in-law, is that he entered the bedroom of O.P. No.2 and tried to molest her. Submission is that on 05.08.2024, the O.P. No.2 was thrown out from her matrimonial house and her valuables and stridhan were snatched away. Post recording of the statement of O.P. No.2 under Section 223 of BNSS followed by statement of Naima Khatoon and Shakeel Ahmad, the applicant came to be summoned under Section 85 of BNS and 4 of D.P. Act on 27.06.2025. 4. Questioning the summoning order, the present application has been preferred. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the entire allegations contained in the complaint are nothing but a bundle of lies, which have got no nexus with the reality. Submission is that only general and omnibus allegations have been leveled. There is no date mentioned with regard to the demand of dowry and further so far as the allegation with regard to the fact that the applicant no.2 had tried to molest, there is no evidence except the bald allegation. It is also contended that there is nothing on record except bald allegation that the O.P. No.2 was thrown out from her matrimonial house on 05.08.2024. Even the statements made under Sections 223 and 225 of BNSS are tailormade just in order to suit the circumstances and the court below without recording any prima facie satisfaction, regarding the attraction of the penal sections has summoned the applicants in a routine manner. Learned counsel for the applicants further as per the instructions submits that the applicant shall be filing a discharge application. 6. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for O.P. No.2 on the other hand submit that perusal of the allegations in the complaint, vis-a-vis the statements under Sections 223 and 225 of BNSS, nowhere show that there is any material contradiction or variation, which goes to the root of the matter which makes the case triable, however, he submits that once the applicants seek to file discharge application, he has no objection. 7. Considering the submissions so made across the Bar and looking into the nature of allegations and stands of the parties, the application is disposed of directing the applicants to file the proceedings by way of discharge application by 12.09.2025 and this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the court below shall decide the same with most expedition. 8. Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants with respect to summoning order dated 27.06.2025 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi and entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case no. 457 of 2024 (Arjuman Jahan Vs. Vakar Ahmad and others), under section 85 B.N.S. and 4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Sarai Akil, District-Kaushambi, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi. 9. The protection accorded to the applicants is only available subject to compliance of terms and conditions and timeline as provided herein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad