Jita @ Jagpta @ Jokhna & Anr. v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko & Anr.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicant no.1 is the Mother-in-law while applicant no.2 is father-in-law of opposite party no. 2. He next added that the bald and general allegations have been levelled in the complaint and all the family members have falsely been implicated and there is no truthfulness in the story narrated thereof. He submits that the applicants are being harassed for their no fault. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra Vs State of U.P. and Others : 2012(10) ADJ 464 and Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and Others Vs State of Bihar and Others : (2022) 6 SCC 599 and submits that the case of the present applicants is squarely covered with the ratio of Judgment aforesaid. Thus, submission is that the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed. 2 A482 No. 9353 of 2025 Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are named in the complaint and their role has been specified and they are not entitled for any relief, hence the petition may be dismissed. The matter requires consideration. Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. List after four weeks. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 may file counter affidavits. Till the next date of listing, the proceedings of the aforesaid Complaint Case No. 1389 of 2019 shall remain stayed so far as the present applicants are concerned. November 6, 2025 Shravan (Rajeev Bharti,J.)