HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 32923 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Mahtab Alam, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Moti Lal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.25521 of 2023 (Zoya Nisha. Vs. Javed and others) including summoning order dated 04.04.2025, under section 498-A I.P.C. and Section 4 D.P. Act passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) F.T.C.- Ist/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. 3. The case of the applicants is that they happen to be husband, father-in- law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the opposite party No. 2, marriage of the opposite party No. 2 stood solemnized with the applicant No.1 on 25.5.2013 allegation is that though in the marriage huge expenditures were incurred, gold items, gold silver items, utensils were offered to the applicants by the opposite party No. 2 but the demand was much more of Rs.2 lakhs in cash, motorcycle and a refrigerator, however, on account of non-satisfaction of the same, the opposite party No. 2 was subjected to maltreatment, assault and with the wedlock two daughters were born. However, on 15.5.2020, the opposite party No.2 was thrown out of her matrimonial house and thereafter a Panchayat was convened on 15.5.2023, pursuant whereto the opposite party No.2 returned back to her matrimonial house. However, on 16.5.2023, at 10 o'clock, the applicants assaulted and beaten up the opposite party No.2 on account of non- fulfillment of the demand of Rs.2 lakhs cash, refrigerator and a Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahtab Alam, Mohammad Yaseen Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohammad Javed And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) motorcycle then thereafter a complaint was lodged on 16.6.2023. Post recording of the statements under Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the complainant followed by of Mukaddar s/o Kamaruddin, Mohammad Riaz, the applicants came to be summoned on 4.4.2025 under Section 498A read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act. 4. Questioning the summoning order, the present application has been preferred. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that totally all the allegations have been levelled without there being any basis whatsoever. He has further submitted that no demand of dowry was ever made as it is highly inconceivable and improbable that after the birth of two children, dowry of demand would be made. It is also contended that the dates mentioned of demand of dowry on 15.05.2020 and 15.05.2023 are being referred only for namesake, just in order to falsely implicate the applicant. It is further contended that the opposite party no.2, in order to harass the applicants has initiated proceedings of maintenance in which an order came to be passed on 31.12.2021 against the applicant no.1 for payment of Rs.3000/- as maintenance. It is also contended that on 26.05.2022, at 3, when the applicant no. 1 and his mother were at home, then the opposite party no. 2 and her family member came in a car in which the father-in- law, brother-in-law and 5 other persons of the applicants were there, they broke the wallet/chest of the applicant no.1 and took away jewellery, TV and other articles, complaint whereof was made to police station as no action was taken, so, complaint was also lodged before police and thereafter, a Criminal Case no. 12853 of 2022 came to be lodged pursuant whereto the family member of opposite party no.2 was summoned under Sections 323, 427, 504, 506, 379 IPC and then the opposite party no. 2 faction preferred and a charge sheet came to be submitted and an application U/S 482 No. 22448 of 2023, Mukaddar and two others v. State of U.P. was preferred in which interim protection was accorded. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that only on the basis of false and incorrect allegations, the applicants have been summoned, the prosecution witnesses are tailormade, the applicants are to be summoned in a routine manner without there being any prima facie satisfaction to the NA528 No. 32923 of 2025 2 application of the attraction of the penal sections. Learned counsel for the applicants as per the instructions, submits that the applicants shall be preferring discharge application seeking discharge. 7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that from the perusal of the complaint vis-a-vis the statements under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC, prima facie, there are no material contradictions or variations. Merely because applicants happen to be father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother- in-law, it would not absolve the possibility of commission of crime, particularly when each and every case depends on its own facts, however, according to him, it is always open for the applicants to avail the remedy of filing discharge application. 8. Considering the submissions so made across the Bar and after perusing the record, and looking into the over all facts situation, stand taken by the applicants as well as the nature of the allegations, without entering into the merits, the application stands disposed of directing the applicants to submit a discharge application by 26.9.2025. On the receipt of the said motion, the court below shall decide the discharge application. 9. Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action be taken against the applicants with respect to the Complaint Case No.25521 of 2023 (Zoya Nisha. Vs. Javed and others) including summoning order dated 04.04.2025, under section 498-A I.P.C. and Section 4 D.P. Act passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.) F.T.C.-Ist/Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. 10. The protection accorded to the applicant 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. September 1, 2025 piyush NA528 No. 32923 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad