Rakesh Soni and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145315

Court No. - 75

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6171 of 2025

Applicant :- Rakesh Soni And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri S.P. Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicants to quash the proceeding of Complaint Case No. 85751 of 2023 (Sarita Verma Vs. Rakesh Soni) u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Manduadih, District Varanasi pending before the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that they are husband, mother-in-law, Jeth and Jethani , marriage of the opposite party no. 2 stood solemnized with the applicant no. 1 on 27.02.2009. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the summoning order dated 11.09.2024 summoning the applicants under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act cannot be sustained for the simple reason that it is highly inconceivable and implorable that for a marriage which had occurred on 27.02.2009 and the baby was born in the year 2010 after such a long period of more than 14 years, the complaint could have been lodged. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the entire theory so sought to be propounded by the prosecution as alleged in the proceedings under

¶9

Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. with regard to demand of dowry of Rs. 5 lakhs as no basis at all, there is no detail of the date on which the said demand was made. It is further contended that even in the year 2012 another baby was born. It is also contended that the opposite party no. 2 was forced to live all alone in a separate living on 14.10.2015 is nothing but a bundle of lies but it is only on account of the sweet will and opposite party no. 2 that she is living there. It is also contended that the parties are themselves litigating at various forums as the opposite party no. 2 has also initiated proceedings under Sections 12, 16, 18, 20 and 22 of the D.V. Act being Case No. 126 of 2018 followed by the lodging of the proceedings by way of Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 20 of 2023, in which orders came to be passed on 27.02.2023 and also the proceedings under Section 9 & 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act sought to be initiated in that regard. Submission is that though the applicants have been summoned on 11.09.2024 under Section 323 IPC also but there is no injury report available on record, the statements of the opposite party no. 2 under Section 200 Cr.P.C. followed by the statements of Ajay Verma and Madan Kishore, under section 202 Cr.P.C. are tailor made just in order to suit the circumstances in favour of the prosecution. Submission is that the court below in a routine manner has summoned the applicants without there being any prima facie recording of satisfaction about the application/ attraction of the penal consequences. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants shall be filing a discharge application and till the discharge application is being decided, no coercive action be taken.

¶10

Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that from the perusal of the complaint vis-a-vis the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., prime facie the case is triable as there are no

¶11

material contradictions in the statements. He further submitted that the applicants may file discharge application.

¶12

Looking into the overall facts of the case, the application is disposed of directing the applicants to submit a discharge application by 19.09.2025 to take all legal and factual grounds which are advisable and permissible under law and on the said motion, the court below shall decide the discharge application with most expedition.

¶13

Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive action is being taken against the applicants in pursuance of the Complaint Case No. 85751 of 2023 (Sarita Verma Vs. Rakesh Soni) u/s 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. r/w Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Manduadih, District Varanasi pending before the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2.

¶14

The protection accorded to the applicants is only available subject to compliance of the terms and conditions and timeline as provided herein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench.

¶15

Order Date :- 22.8.2025 A. Prajapati

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Soni and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Soni and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases