Atul and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

Atul and 6 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim stay of the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 and of all further proceedings of Complaint Case No. 725/2023 till the next date of listing, with notice to respondent no. 2 and relisting in the next month with service report.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned summoning order dated 25.08.2023 issued under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. is sustainable, given the alleged contradiction between the averments of the complaint filed by respondent no. 2 on 15.03.2023 and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C.

Court's answer

The Court found that the matter raised by the applicants' submissions regarding the sustainability of the impugned summoning order requires consideration.

Ratio / Principle

Notice was ordered to be issued to respondent no. 2.

Key takeaways

The matter was directed to be listed in the next month with service report.ratio¶11
Till the next date of listing, the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 725/2023 pending in the court of Civil Judge(S.D.)/ FTC, Lucknow, and all further proceedings of the complaint case, shall remain stayed.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 12), Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar, J. — APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 5726 of 2025, Atul and 6 others v. State of U.P. (thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko.) and another; Order dated 18.7.2025. The applicants (family of applicant no. 7) had been summoned under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. by the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 725/2023 pending before the Civil Judge(S.D.)/FTC, Lucknow. Learned counsel submitted that the complaint filed by respondent no. 2 (husband of applicant no. 7) on 15.03.2023 was a counter-blast to applicant no. 7's Section 12 Domestic Violence Act application filed on 03.01.2023 after she was ousted after beating on 14.11.2022, and that the summoning order ignored contradictions between the complaint averments and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C — notably, the complaint's claim that the applicants took away jewellery kept in the box finds no corresponding statement. The learned AGA could not contradict these submissions. Finding the matter to require consideration, the Court ordered notice to respondent no. 2 (steps within a week), directed listing in the next month with service report, and stayed the impugned order and all further proceedings of the complaint case till the next date of listing. Interim relief only; no final adjudication of the sustainability of the summoning order.

Court No. - 12

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5726 of 2025

Applicant :- Atul And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.

Heard Sri Lalji Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on account of some matrimonial discord between the applicant no.7 and the respondent no.2, who are wife and husband, application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act was filed by the applicant no.7 on 03.01.2023, in which the respondent no.2 and his family members have been summoned. It was disclosed in the application that the applicant no.7 has been ousted after beating on 14.11.2022. In counter blast to the same after 2/3 month, a complaint has been filed by the respondent no.2 on 15.03.2023 against the applicant no.7 and all her family members. He further submits that false complaint has been filed because there is contradiction in the averments made in the complaint and the statements recorded under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C but without considering it the applicants have been summoned under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C. by means of the impugned order dated 25.08.2023. In the complaint, it has been stated that the applicants have taken away the jewellery kept in the box but in the statements there is no such statement. Thus submission is that, the impugned order is not sustainable.

Learned AGA though opposed the prayer but could not contradict the aforesaid submissions.

The matter requires consideration.

Issue notice to the respondent no.2.

Steps to be taken within a week.

List in the next month with service report.

Till the next date of listing, the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No.725/2023 pending in the court of Civil Judge(S.D.)/ FTC, Lucknow and further proceedings of Complaint case shall remain stayed.

Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Akanksha Sri/-

Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench