Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144426 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30938 of 2025 Applicant :- Gajraj And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Bhuwal 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 25.06.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.613 of 2023, Seema vs. Gajraj and others, under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 354 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Harduaganj, District Aligarh. 3.The case of the applicant is that the O.P. No.2 who happens to be the wife of applicant no.1 had initiated proceedings under Section 156(3) of CrPC for the offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act against the applicants who happens to be the husband, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in- law and maternal nephew with an allegation that the marriage of the applicant no.1 stood solemnized with O.P. No.2 on 10.12.2005 and demand of dowry was raised to the tune of Rs.50,000/-. The allegation is that the parents of O.P. No.2 had, at the time of marriage, incurred huge expenditure, but the same was not as per the expectation and thereafter demand of dowry was being raised and atrocities and malpractices were committed and post-birth of two children too there had been no change and demand of dowry was being raised and assault became a common feature and the O.P. No.2 was thrown out, complaint whereof was made before the S.S.P., but nothing happened followed by the complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC on 31.07.2023 and thereafter post recording of the statement of O.P. No.2 under Section 200 of CrPC of the complainant followed by statement under Section 202 of CrPC of Mukesh Kumar and Jitendra, the applicants no.1 to 4 came to be summoned under Section 498-A, 323, 504 IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and applicant no.5 came to be summoned under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 354 IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act on 25.06.2024. 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 without therebeing any specific allegation. Submission is that though the allegation is with regard to extension of injury, but there is no injury report available on record. He further submits that it is highly improbable and inconceivable that post-birth of two children from the wedlock of applicant no.1 and O.P. No.2, demand of dowry of Rs.50,000/- could be made. Even the statements made under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC 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 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. 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 25.06.2024 as well as Complaint Case No.613 of 2023, Seema vs. Gajraj and others, under Section 498-A, 323, 504, 354 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Harduaganj, District Aligarh. 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