HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35782 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Ms. Shivangi Bhargava, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Moti Lal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 05.02.2025, U/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act. In Complaint Case No 15958 of 2024 (Sapna Rastogi Vs Akash Rastogi And Others), passed by Additional Civil JudgeCD-Ist/ACJM, Gorakhpur. Police Station, Shahpur, Gorakhpur. 4. The case of the applicants is that complaint was lodged by the opposite party no.2 wife on 30.3.2024 against the applicants, who are father-in-law, and Nanad and husband is non applicant along with others under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of the D.P. Act with an allegation that the marriage of the O.P. No.2 stood solemnized with Akash Rastogi on 2.6.2009 and with the wedlock a baby was born on 30.1.2013. Allegation is that though post marriage everything is normal but demand of dowry was being raised and the husband of the opposite party no.2 had squandered the entire savings and income and when the opposite party no.2 had gone to her maternal house though the applicants do not care and during the Corona period the mother-in-law of the opposite party no.2 died from that moment the applicants no.2 to 4 started influencing the entire activating in the house and on 6.3.2024 at 7.30 p.m. abuses were hurled the applicants were Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Neeraj Kumar Bhargava, Shivangi Bhargava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Suresh Kumar Rastogi And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) assaulted Rs.10,00,000/- dowry was demanded. Post recording of the statements under Section 200 Cr.P.C. of the complainant and under Section 202 Cr.P.C. of the Rakesh Kumar Tiwari followed by Shambhoo Nath Tiwari, the applicants came to be summoned under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and under Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act on 5.2.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that on the perusal of the complaint it would make it more than evident that the complainant recides at Gorakhpur whereas the applicants are resides at Rampur Haridwar and thus mandatory enquiry under Section 202 (1) of the Cr.P.C. ought to have been conducted. He has further submitted that only general and omnibus allegations have been levelled without there being any specific allegations and whatever demand of dowry is being alleged the same is only relatable and attributable to the husband and not the applicants who are having separate living. It is also contended that there are no instances given with regard to demand of dowry except an incident dated 6.3.2024 when the opposite party no.2 was thrown out from the matrimonial house. He has also submitted that the applicants are entitled to protection in view of the judgement of the Hon. Apex Court in Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2012 (10) ADJ 464 and on the basis of tailormade statements which suits the prosecution case and the court below has summoned applicants without recording any prima facie satisfaction about the attraction of the penal sections in a routine manner. Learned counsel for the applicants as per the instructions, submits that the applicants shall be preferring discharge application seeking discharge. 6. 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 Cr.P.C., prima facie, there are no material contradictions or variations. Merely because applicants happen to be father-in-law and sister-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. 7. 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 NA528 No. 35782 of 2025 2 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 9.10.2025. On the receipt of the said motion, the court below shall decide the discharge application. 8. Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action be taken against the applicants with respect to the summoning order dated 05.02.2025, U/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act. In Complaint Case No 15958 of 2024 (Sapna Rastogi Vs Akash Rastogi And Others), passed by Additional Civil JudgeCD-Ist/ACJM, Gorakhpur. Police Station, Shahpur, Gorakhpur. 9. 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 17, 2025 piyush NA528 No. 35782 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad