HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35005 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Bind (AoR No. A/A 2231/2013) holding brief of Sri Mohit Kumar Tiwari, 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 25.07.2025 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Warrant or summons Criminal Case No.13759/2024 (Mehroona Versus Sadab and others) pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/J.M. FTC-2, Farrukhabad Under Section 498A, 323, 506 IPC and 4 D.P.Act related to Police Station Amritpur, District Farrukhabad. 3. The case of the applicant is that the proceedings under Section 156(3) CrPC came to be lodged by O.P. No.2 against the husband and other non- applicants including the present applicants being father-in-law, devar and unmarried nanad with an allegation that marriage of O.P. No.2 stood solemnized on 09.07.2023 with one Shadab and at the time of the marriage, huge expenditures were incurrect, however, the applicants were not happy with the demand as their demand was something more being Rs.1,00,000/- cash along with other items. When the O.P. No.2 showed her incapacity to fulfill the said demand, then she was thrown out of her matrimonial house on 18.08.2023 in clothes which she was wearing and now on 21.12.2023, the applicants herein along with the other co-accused came to be house of O.P. No.2 and thereafter, on account of good-books so offered, an agreement Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohit Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sharafat And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) stood entered and on 23.04.2024, the allegation is that the O.P. No.2 was subjected to assault and again O.P. No.2 was dropped in her inlaws place. A complaint is stated to have been lodged. It is also alleged that on 28.04.2024 at 10:00 in the morning with regard to non-fulfillment of the demand of Rs.1,00,000/-, the O.P. no.2 was assaulted. The case stood transformed into a complaint case and post recording of the statement of complainant under Section 200 of CrPC followed by statement of Sudhir and Dilshad under Section 202 CrPC, the applicant s came to be summoned under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 4 of D.P. Act. 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 even for a single moment. Elaborating the said submission, it is contended that a perusal of the complainant under Section 200 of CrPC, there is no recital or even a word about the date on which the said incident took place, however, only this much has been said that the O.P. No.2 was assaulted. Submission is that had the applicant assaulted the O.P. No.2, then the O.P. No.2 being the injured, who claims to have got herself medically examined, ought to have made a specific statement pinpointing criminality upon the applicants. He submits that even the statements of the other prosecution witnesses under Section 202 of CrPC are tailormade and further barring the bald allegation there is no iota of evidence to substantiate that the applicants have committed the said offence. He further submits that the husband of the O.P. No.2 has already obtained bail and he is contesting the trial and the applicants herein are father-in-law, devar and unmarried nanand. Thus, they are entitled to the protection as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2012 (10) ADJ 464. It is also contended that the applicants are innocent, merely because they are the family members being inlaws, they have been falsely implicated and whatever criminality, if any, (though disputed), the same can be attributed to the husband and not the applicant. It is further contended that 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 NA528 No. 35005 of 2025 2 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 09.10.2025 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 25.07.2025 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Warrant or summons Criminal Case No.13759/2024 (Mehroona Versus Sadab and others) pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/J.M. FTC-2, Farrukhabad Under Section 498A, 323, 506 IPC and 4 D.P.Act related to Police Station Amritpur, District Farrukhabad. 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. September 12, 2025 N.S.Rathour NA528 No. 35005 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad