HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34843 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Ravindra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 14-07-2025 arising out of Complaint Case No. 25957 of 2024 (Smt. Priyanka Versus Ramu and others) under section 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Aurangabad, District- Bulandshahar against the applicant as well as entire criminal proceeding initiated against the applicant in Complaint Case No. 25957 of 2024 (Smt. Priyanka Versus Ramu and others) under section 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C, and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Aurangabad, District- Bulandshahar pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Bulandshahar District-Bulandshahar. 3. The case of the applicant is that a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no.2 wife on 30.7.2024. against the applicant, who happens to be the husband and other family members, is an accused in the proceedings under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., with an allegation is that the marriage of the O.P. No.2 stood solemnized with applicant no.1 on 25.11.2020 at the time of the marriage huge expenditures worth Rs.6,00,000/- were incurred while gifting LED,Sofa, etc. but the applicant was not happy with the said offeres and their demand was much more, they demanded additional dowry and the opposite party no.2 was assaulted on 16.2.2024 on the premise that in case the four-wheeler not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravindra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ramu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) gifted then the opposite party no.2 could not be allowed to stay in the matrimonial house and thereafter on 16.2.2024 she was thrown out from the matrimonial house and she is living in the maternal house and the complaint in this regard has been made on 1.3.2024 and 3.7.2024 thereafter post recording of the statement of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. followed by of Kanchind under Section 202 Cr.P.C. the applicant came to be summoned on 14.7.2025, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act. 4. Questioning the summoning the applicant has filed the present application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the entire proceedings stood lodged by virtue of a complaint on 30.7.3024 that too under the provisions contained under Section 175(3) B.N.S.S. however the applicant has been summoned under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act under the old Act. He has further contended that the present complaint is nothing but a counterblast in a retaliation as earlier the applicant had preferred a Complaint No.455 of 2024, Ramu Vs. Chhotu and others, under Sections 323, 452, 379, 504, 506 IPC on 20.6.2024 in which on 18.1.2025 summoning order came to be passed under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC. He has also submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated and there has been no demand of dowry and is no question of throwing out of opposite party no.2 on her matrimonial house and there are no one instances given when the demand of dowry was made only general and omnibus allegations have been made and on the basis tailormade statements the applicant has been summoned without demanding of prima facie satisfaction. Learned counsel for the applicant as per the instructions, submits that the applicant 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 CrPC, prima facie, there are no material contradictions or variations. Merely because applicant happen to be husband, 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 NA528 No. 34843 of 2025 2 the applicant 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 applicant as well as the nature of the allegations, without entering into the merits, the application stands disposed of directing the applicant 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 applicant with respect to the order dated 14-07-2025 arising out of Complaint Case No. 25957 of 2024 (Smt. Priyanka Versus Ramu and others) under section 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Aurangabad, District-Bulandshahar against the applicant as well as entire criminal proceeding initiated against the applicant in Complaint Case No. 25957 of 2024 (Smt. Priyanka Versus Ramu and others) under section 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Aurangabad, District- Bulandshahar pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Bulandshahar, District- Bulandshahar. 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 11, 2025 piyush NA528 No. 34843 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad