Bhuvnesh v. Shubham and others), under Sections
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118896 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25542 of 2025
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Shubham And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Sunil Kumar Saroj Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Moti Lal learned AGA for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing the entire proceeding of the Complaint Case No.939 of 2024 (Bhuvnesh versus Shubham and others), under Sections 85, 115(2) and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Amroha pending in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court Second, District Amroha and the Summoning order dated 15.04.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court Second, District Amroha in Complaint Case No.939 of 2024 (Bhuvnesh versus Shubham and others), under Sections 85, 115(2) and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Amroha pending in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court Second, District Amroha. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that a complaint was preferred by the opposite party no.2 for the offences under Sections 115, 352, 351 (2), 85 BNSS, read with the section 3/4 of the D.P. Act on 16.12.2024 against the applicants husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law and others with an allegation that on 16.04.2019, the marriage of the opposite party no.2 stood solemnized with the applicant no. 1 and demand of dowry was being made, when the opposite party no.2 showed her inability to make the said payment as already gifts were handed over as per the expectations and the status of the opposite party no.2, then the applicants herein became furiated and they sought to harass the opposite party no.2 while assaulting in the complaint it was also alleged that the opposite party no.2 after taking money from her parents had given 1 lakh rupees to the applicants, however their demand for more and more gifts and dowry was there. On 10.07.2020, with the wedlock of the opposite party no.2 and the applicant no. 1, a baby was born, however the demand was consistently made for satisfaction of demand of dowry. It is also alleged that the opposite party no.2 was thrown out from a matrimonial house since according to them the dowry was not paid. Thereafter, proceedings came to be lodged under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC in which the applicants were summoned and thereafter on a gift being offered of a buffalo and rupees 50,000, on 20.05.2023 the opposite party no.2 was given permission to stay in her matrimonial house. Thereafter, on 3.11.2023, again the opposite party no.2 was subjected to cruelty and maltreatment by the applicants. In this regard, an application has also been submitted, a complaint was written to the Superintendent of Police, nothing was done, thus, the impugned proceedings stood initiated and post recording of the statement under Section 223 of the B.N.S.S. of the opposite party no.2, Section 225 of the B.N.S.S. of Munni, the same transformed into a Complaint Case no. 939 of 2024 and post issuance of the notice in view of first proviso of Section 223 of the B.N.S.S., the applicants entered their appearance and after hearing then, the applicants have been summoned under Sections 85, 115(2) B.N.S.S. read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated, they have at no point of time committed the such offence as even previously also, proceedings under Sections 498, 323, 504, 506, IPC, read with Section 3/4 of the D.P.Act came to be preferred by the opposite party no.2, which resulted in acquittal on 5.2.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that just in order to exert pressure and take their terms on the basis of false and incorrect allegations, the applicants have been summoned. 6. Argument is that on 19.5.2023, the applicant no.1 had executed a sale deed while transferring certain piece of land and it was decided on the basis of an agreement that proceedings will be drawn for divorce. Further argument is that the opposite party no.2 is resiling from the said agreement. 7. Submission is that there is nothing on record to show that any injury has been sustained and the entire allegations are false and concocted. The court below on mere asking has summoned the applicants and the contentions so raised by the applicants have not been considered. 8. Learned AGA on the other hand, submits that whatever might be, offences are made out from the statements under Section 223, BNSS read with Section 225, BNSS vis.a.vis the complaint. He submits that the court below has passed an order strictly in accordance with law and the same cannot be said to be, suffering from any legal infirmity. 9. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. Apparently, proceedings stood lodged by the opposite party no.2 against the applicants which resulted in summoning of the applicants. The opposite party no.2 has come up with a stand that with relation to demand of dowry, on 3.11.2023, the opposite party no.2 was assaulted and she was thrown out from the matrimonial house and she was subjected to violence and harassment. 10. As regards the submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that earlier also proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, IPC, read with Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act stood initiated by the opposite party no.2 which resulted in acquittal on 5.2.2024, thus, the present complaint contains incorrect facts and it is a malicious prosecution is concerned, the same is a subject matter of trial as the allegations are referable to the incident of demand of dowry and commission of the offence post the order acquitting them i.e. 3.11.2023. 11. The statements under Sections 223 BNSS and 225 BNSS are also in line with the allegations contained in the complaint. With respect to the argument that there happened to be a settlement between the parties pursuant to an execution of a sale deed dated 19.5.2023 that the parties would live separately is concerned, the same at best is a matter of defence, consideration whereof would be required only at the stage when the trial commences. 12. In absence of pointing out any legal infirmity committed by the court below, and also the fact that there are no material contradictions or variations in the statement under sections 223 BNSS and 225 BNSS, vis-a-vis the complaint. No case is made out for interference.
Decision
13. Accordingly, interference is declined, application stands disposed of leaving it open to the applicants to raise all legal and factual issues before the court below while contesting the trial and this Court has no reasons to disbelieve that the same shall be considered in accordance with law. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad