Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138965 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29739 of 2025 Applicant :- Aditya Sahu @ Sonu 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 applicants and Sri Moti Lal, 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 19.06.2024 passed in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1837 of 2022 (Pallavi Sahu @ Pinki Versus Aditya Sahu & others) Under Section 498-A, 323, 504 Indian Penal Code & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Ballia pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (IInd) Ballia, District-Ballia. 3. The case of the applicant is that a complaint was lodged by the O.P. no.2/ wife on 12.04.2022 against the applicant, who happen to be husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law and other relatives with an allegation that the marriage of the O.P. No.2 stood solemnized with the applicant no.1 on 14.02.2009 and thereafter on 15.02.2009, the O.P. No.2 went to her inlaws' place, however, the applicants were not satisfied with the gifts and expenditure so incurred in the marriage, however, their expectation was for more being four-wheeler and in case, four-wheeler is not offered, then the price equivalent to the same. Further allegation is that with the wedlock of the applicant no.1 and O.P. No.2 two children were born and at the time, when the complaint was lodged, the age of the children 12 years and 10 years respectively, however the allegation is that applicant was assaulted, maltreated and even subjected to atrocities and in the year 2013, she was thrown out of her matrimonial house and her brother took her to her maternal house and till 04.02.2013, she is living in her maternal house and further on 19.02.2022, when the O.P. No.2 had gone to her matrimonial house, then she was assaulted and her stridhan was also taken away, pursuant whereto the O.P. No.2 had no option but to prefer proceedings under Section 156(3) CrPC and post recording of the statement of O.P. No.2 under Section 200 CrPC followed by statement under Sections 202 CrPC of Manish Kumar and Shashi Gupta, the applicant herein has been summoned on 19.06.2024 under Sections 323, 498-A, 504 IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted 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 the applicants have at no point of time has inflicted injuries or assaulted the O.P. No.2. Submission is to the extent that even an exparte divorce decree came to be passed on 03.03.2020 in proceedings in Case No.424 of 2015. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that it is the O.P. No.2, who according to her sweet will is staying in her maternal house and despite the fact that access is freely available, she did not come, however, in order to just falsely implicate the applicants, false and concocted story has been sought to be cooked up. Submission is that though the applicant has been summoned under Section 323 IPC, but there is no iota of evidence that any injury has been extended and there is no injury report on record. He further submits that statements under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC are tailormade just in order to suit the circumstances and tilt it in favour of O.P. No.2 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. 4. 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 200 and 202 of CrPC, 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. 5. 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 08.09.2025 and this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the court below shall decide the same with most expedition. 6. Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants with respect to summoning order dated 19.06.2024 passed in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1837 of 2022 (Pallavi Sahu @ Pinki Versus Aditya Sahu & others) Under Section 498-A, 323, 504 Indian Penal Code & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Ballia pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (IInd) Ballia, District-Ballia. 7. 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 :- 14.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad