HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36677 of 2025 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Sukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, 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 of Complaint Case No. 4971/2022 (Shivani Vs. Dilip Kumar and others) Police Station Friends Colony, District Etawah and summoning order dated 5.3.2025 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC/Judicial Magistrate (Crime Against Women) Etawah under sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC/Judicial Magistrate (Crime Against Women) Etawah. 3. The case of the applicants is that a complaint was lodged by O.P. No.2 on 24.08.2022 against the applicants, who are Jeth, Jethani and husband (non- applicant) and the marriage of the O.P. No.2 stood solemnized applicant no.1 stood solemnized with O.P. No.2 on 02.12.2015. The allegation in the complaint is that in the marriage, several gifts and huge expenditure was incurred, but the applicants were not happy with the same and their demand was for much more and the allegation is that on 13.12.2017, the O.P. No.2 was thrown out from her matrimonial house on the ground of non-fulfillment of demand. Post recording of the statement of O.P. No.2 under Section 200 of CrPC followed by statement of Yogendra Pal and Asha Devi under Section 202 CrPC. On 05.03.2025, the applicant came to be summoned under Section 498-A, 323 IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act. 4. Questioning the summoning order, the present application has been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Raj Kumar And 4 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) preferred. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the entire allegations contained in the complaint are nothing but a bundle of lies, which have got no nexus with the reality. Submission is that only general and omnibus allegations have been leveled and there are no specific allegation against the applicants. There has been no mention or recital of the date of the incident when the demand of dowry was made and whatever allegations are, they are attributable to the husband and not on the applicants, though the applicants have been summoned under Section 323 IPC, but there is no medical report. Further it is contended that the complaint has been lodged in the year 2022, whereas the cause of action is dated 13.12.2017, thus reliance has been placed upon Section 468 of CrPC that the complaint is time barred. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that earlier, a complaint has also been preferred, which has been dismissed for non-prosecution. Now, a fresh complaint has been preferred. It is also 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 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 16.10.2025 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 criminal proceeding of Complaint Case NA528 No. 36677 of 2025 2 No. 4971/2022 (Shivani Vs. Dilip Kumar and others) Police Station Friends Colony, District Etawah and summoning order dated 5.3.2025 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC/Judicial Magistrate (Crime Against Women) Etawah under sections 498A, 323 I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) FTC/Judicial Magistrate (Crime Against Women) Etawah. 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 23, 2025 N.S.Rathour NA528 No. 36677 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad