Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145570 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 31207 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajkumar Patel and 4 others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, 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 26.11.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 05, Varanasi in Criminal Complaint Case No. 612 of 2024 (Garima Singh Vs. Rajkumar Patel and others) under Section 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Ramnagar District Varanasi, pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 05, Varanasi. 3. The case of the applicants is that the proceedings under Section 156(3) of CrPC came to be instituted by O.P. No.2 against the applicants on 07.03.2024 with an allegation that the applicants herein, who happen to be the father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law, have committed offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and the marriage of the O.P. No.2 stood solemnized with Sandeep Patel son of applicants no. 1 and 2. Submission is that certain amount was offered as gift in the marriage for the purpose of purchase of a four-wheeler, which was neither purchased in the name of O.P. No.2 nor her husband, but in the name of the inlaws and loan was also advanced though the money was already there and since the husband of O.P. No.2 is doing service in Delhi, so that became a bone of friction between the inlaws and husband of O.P. No.2 and demand of Rs.25,00,000/- was being raised in that regard as an additional dowry so as to permit access to O.P. No.2 in her matrimonial house, even the allegation is that the O.P. No.2 and her husband were thrown out from the house of O.P. No.2 (matrimonial) on 22.02.2024 and on 02.03.2024 a complaint stood lodged for lodging of the FIR and since the FIR was not lodged, the proceedings under Section 156(3) CrPC came to be preferred. Post recording of the statement of O.P. No.2 under Section 200 of CrPC followed by statement of Jagdish, Seema and Savita Devi under Sections 202 CrPC, the applicants herein came to be summoned under Section 498-A, 323, 506 IPC read with 3/4 of D.P. Act on 26.11.2024. 4. 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 have no legs to stand, as they are nothing but a bundle of lies, which have got no nexus with the reality. Submission is that it is highly improbable and impossible for a man of prudent mind to imagine that the dowry would be demanded by the inlaws and the husband would not demand the dowry, particularly when, here in the present case, the complaint has been lodged in the year 2024 and marriage is of the year 2022. It is contended that barring allegation of additional dowry of Rs.25,00,000/- there is no detail or date mentioned as to when the dowry was demanded and further the statement of witnesses 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. 5. Learned A.G.A. 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. 6. Considering the submissions so made across the Bar and looking into the nature of allegations and stand of the parties, the application is disposed of directing the applicants to file the proceedings by way of discharge application by 05.09.2025 and this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the court below shall decide the same with most expedition. 7. Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants with respect to summoning order dated 26.11.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 05, Varanasi in Criminal Complaint Case No. 612 of 2024 (Garima Singh Vs. Rajkumar Patel and others) under Section 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Ramnagar District Varanasi, pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 05, Varanasi. 8. 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 :- 23.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) NA528 No. 31207 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad