HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30532 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit, filed today, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri R.S. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 07.08.2023 in Complaint Case No. 8892 of 2022 (Shabnam Khatoon Versus Karamuddin and others), Under Section 498A, 323 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Madanpur, District - Deoria, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C. Court No. 11, Deoria. 4. The case of the applicant is that on 03.08.2022, a complaint came to be filed by the opposite party no. 2 against the applicants under section 498A, 147, 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC read with section 3/4 D.P. Act against the applicants who are father-in-law, mother-in-law and Devar and the non- applicants being husband, father-in-law, devar and Nanad, with an allegation that the marriage of the opposite party no. 2 stood solemnized with one Karamuddin on 20.03.2016 and in the marriage, several gifts were offered and huge expenditures were incurred being a motorcycle, gold ornaments, sofa set, bed etc. However, the approach of the applicants against the opposite party no. 2 became bad to worst on the premise that the opposite party no.2 had not offered the gift by way of Maruti car and Rs. 3,00,000/- cash and with the wedlock of the opposite party no. 2 with the husband, a Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mamta Pandey, R.S. Pandey, Rajshree Malviya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Najma Khatoon And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) baby was born and on 19.07.2022 in the morning, the father-in-law of the opposite party no.2 caught hold of the shoulder of the opposite party no. 2 and tried to pull and when hue and cry was raised then the applicants and other co-accused came there and instead of supporting the case of the opposite party no. 2, they started assaulting and hurling abuses in Hindi vernacular. Post recording of the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the applicant no. 1 had been summoned under Section 498A, 323 IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act and the applicant no. 2 under Section 323 IPC. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that, particularly, the entire allegations has nothing but the bundle of lies having no nexus with reality, further at no point of time, the applicants have committed the offence just in order to falsely implicate the applicants. It is also argued that the opposite party no. 2 has at no point of time thrown out her matrimonial house and she has gone to maternal house on a sweet-will. It is also contended that though the applicant no. 2 have been summoned under Section 323 IPC but there is no medical report available on record. Further submission is that only bald and omnibus allegations have been levelled without there being any specific allegations, the applicants have been summoned in a routine manner on the basis of the statements. It is further contended that the court below without recording any prima facie satisfaction regarding the attraction of the penal provisions has summoned the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants shall be filing a discharge application and till the discharge application is being decided, no coercive action be taken. 6. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that from the perusal of the complaint vis-a-vis the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., prime facie the case is triable as there are no material contradictions in the statements. He further submitted that the applicants may file discharge application. 7. Looking into the overall facts of the case, the application is disposed of directing the applicants to submit a discharge application by 09.10.2025 to take all legal and factual grounds which are advisable and permissible under law and on the said motion, the court below shall decide the discharge application with most expedition. 8. Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action is being taken against the applicants in pursuance of the summoning order dated NA528 No. 30532 of 2025 2 07.08.2023 in Complaint Case No. 8892 of 2022 (Shabnam Khatoon Versus Karamuddin and others), Under Section 498A, 323 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Madanpur, District - Deoria, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ F.T.C. Court No. 11, Deoria. 9. The protection accorded to the applicants is only available subject to compliance of the terms and conditions and timeline as provided herein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. September 12, 2025 A. Prajapati NA528 No. 30532 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad