HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35683 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Kundar Kumar, 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 entire criminal proceeding in Complaint Case No.105154 of 2021 (Smt. Komal Verma Vs. Manish Verma @ Manish Kumar Verma and others) Under Section 498A of I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act, arising out of Misc. Application No.3513 of 2021 (Smt. Komal Verma Vs. Manish Verma @ Manish Kumar Verma and others) under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar, as well as the impugned summoning order dated 27.02.2023 passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-VIII, Kanpur Nagar. 3. The case of the applicant is that proceedings under Section 156(3) of CrPC came to be lodged by O.P. No.2 on 09.09.2021 against the applicants, who happens to be husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and the non- applicant (devar) with an allegation that on 07.03.2018, the marriage of O.P. No.2 stood solemnized with the applicant no.1 and at the time of marriage, several gifts including Rs.2,00,000/- in cash, household items as well as a four-wheeler car was also offered as gift. However, O.P. No.2 was thrown out from her matrimonial house 15.06.2020 on the premise that the expectation of the applicants with regard to fulfillment of dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- was not accomplished, and on 03.01.2021 when she was in her maternal house, then the applicants herein barged there and assaulted and demanded dowry. It is also contended that when the O.P. No.2 had gone to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kundan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Manish Verma Alias Manish Kumar Verma And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) matrimonial house for getting her stridhan, the same was refused. A complaint was lodged on 23.08.2021 followed by proceedings on 09.09.2021. Thereafter on 09.09.2021, the case was transformed into a complaint case. Post recording of the statement of O.P. No.2 under Section 200 of CrPC followed by statement under Section 202 of CrPC of Neelam, the applicants came to be summoned in Complaint Case no. 3513 of 2021 on 27.02.2023 under Sections 498-A of IPC read with section 3/4 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 for the simple reason that in the impugned complaint in para-12, it has been asserted that this is the first complaint and previously no complaint had been lodged, but actually, prior to it a complaint no. 345 of 2021/7384 of 2021, came to be preferred by O.P. No.2 against the applicants in the month of January, 2021, wherein the applicants came to be summoned on 20.07.2022 under Section 498-A, 323, 504 IPC. Submission is that with respect to the same incident, two parallel complaints cannot proceed, particularly when it would be nothing but a classic case of grossest misuse of process of law. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicants at no point of time had demanded any dowry. Only general and omnibus allegations have been leveled and further the statements of the witnesses 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 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 NA528 No. 35683 of 2025 2 directing the applicants to file the proceedings by way of discharge application by 31.10.2025 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 in Complaint Case No.105154 of 2021 (Smt. Komal Verma Vs. Manish Verma @ Manish Kumar Verma and others) Under Section 498A of I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act, arising out of Misc. Application No.3513 of 2021 (Smt. Komal Verma Vs. Manish Verma @ Manish Kumar Verma and others) under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar, as well as the in summoning order dated 27.02.2023 passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-VIII, Kanpur Nagar. 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 24, 2025 N.S.Rathour NA528 No. 35683 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad