ABHISHEK VERMA AND 4 OTHERSversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

               APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22516 of 2024

Abhishek Verma And 4 Others
                                                              .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                  .....Opposite
                                                                        Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Ram Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anuj Kumar Chaudhary, G.A., Ganesh
                                Shanker Srivastava

Court No. - 81
                      HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available
on record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 has been filed with the prayer to quash the proceedings of
the Criminal Complaint Case No. 3388 of 2021 (Ram Beti versus Kishan
Verma and others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC Police Station-
Govind Nagar, District- Kanpur Nagar pending in the court of Learned M.M.
IV, Kanpur Nagar, along with the impugned summoning order dated
09.11.2022 passed by the Learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court
No.03 Kanpur Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that, the applicants have been
falsely implicated, as the allegations made are totally false, frivolous and
baseless. The complainant has filed another complaint based on the same set
of facts and allegations and the present complaint is only a repetition of the
earlier complaint being lodged in the year 2020, therefore, there cannot be
two sets of litigation based on similar circumstances. Learned counsel for the
applicants further submits that, there are no allegations of Section 323 either
made by the complainant or the witnesses, therefore, the impugned
summoning order dated 9.11.2024 is liable to be quashed and set aside, as
also the proceedings arising therefrom and the instant application under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is liable to be
allowed.

4. Per contra, learned AGA for State has opposed the prayer made on behalf
of the applicants and has submitted that, earlier an FIR was lodged by the
daughter of opposite party No.2, namely, Subhadra, who is wife of applicant
No.1, against applicant Nos. 1 to 3 bearing FIR No.0387 of 2020, under
                                                          A482 No. 22516 of 2024
                                2

Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 354 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3/4
of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, at Police Station Govind Nagar, District
Kanpur City, wherein charge sheet has been submitted against applicant
No.1 and only to harass and pressurize the victim, applicant No.1 has lodged
a first information report against the victim, opposite party No.2 (mother of
victim) and her other family members on 9.5.2021 bearing FIR No.0167 of
2021, under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 380 and 406 of Indian Penal
Code, 1860, at Police Station Govind District South (Commissionerate
Kanpur Nagar), wherein charge sheet has also submitted. Learned AGA for
the State has further submitted that, applicant No.1 and his family members
have sent several threatening messages, which contains derogatory language,
and the screenshots of the same have been annexed in the counter affidavit
dated 18.5.2025 filed by learned counsel for opposite party No.2. Learned
AGA for the State further submits that, so far as evidence and events
subsequent to the earlier FIR are concerned, they are separate and distinct,
therefore, the same requires trial, wherein both sides will have adequate and
ample opportunity of hearing. Thus, the instant application under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is liable to be dismissed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants, in rebuttal, has submitted that, the
mobile numbers shown in the screenshots are not related to the applicants
and screenshots are fake and fabricated and neither the applicant No.1 nor
any other family member has ever threatened the victim or her family
members. However, if it is presumed that, it is not so, the allegations of
sending derogatory messages are in respect to applicant No.1 only and no
other family member is involved in the same.

6. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties and having perused
the record, it is evident that, the complainant of this case i.e opposite party
No.2 is the mother-in-law of the applicant No.1. The marriage of the
daughter of the opposite party No.2, namely, Subhadra was solemnized with
the applicant No.1 on 2.7.2017 according to custom of Hindu ritual and rites.
There was earlier an FIR lodged against the applicant Nos.1 to 3 in the year
2020 and thereafter, a cross case was also registered by applicant No.1
against the victim and her family members. In the present complaint,
allegations of demand of dowry and cruelty have been levelled against the
applicants. So far as harassment and cruelty is concerned, it is a crime,
which is continuous in nature and may give rise to fresh cause of action, as
and when, either any physical assault took place or cruelty meted out to the
victim. It has come on record that, in the counter affidavit filed by opposite
party No.2, some screenshots of messages have been placed on record,
which contains some filthy and derogatory language and the messages are
alleged to be sent by the husband of the victim i.e. applicant No.1 herein.
The language used is not only derogatory and filthy, but also unbecoming,
unhealthy and against the basic canons of propriety of social norms,
therefore, a fresh cause of action has arisen, wherein the victim has been
harassed not only by verbal communication, but by written messages, sent
by the husband to his wife and her family members, stating several negative
                                                                                           A482 No. 22516 of 2024
                                                                   3

                                    and derogatory words against the wife's mother, brother and entire family.
                                    However, prima facie, a case is made out against the applicant No.1 only and
                                    in respect to applicant Nos. 2 and 4, Dipti Verma and Preeti Verma,
                                    respectively, [sister-in-laws of victim (daughter opposite party No.2)],
                                    applicant No.3/ Amit Verma (husband of applicant No.2) and applicant
                                    No.5/ Avinash Verma (husband of applicant No.4), no case is made out.
                                    Accordingly, the proceedings in question are hereby quashed and set aside
                                    only in respect of applicant Nos. 2 to 5.

                                    7. The instant application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
                                    Procedure, 1973 stands disposed of in view of above.
                                    May 12, 2026
                                    Gurpreet Singh
                                                                                             (Harvir Singh,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
GURPREET SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad