Mayank Sharma Vs State of U.P.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Mayank Sharma with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.183 of 2025, under Sections-108, 85 BNS & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Roza, District-Shahjahanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since since 29.03.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a First Information Report was lodged by the first informant on 28.03.2025, against the applicant and his mother namely Shushma Sharma, with the allegation that the marriage of his daughter, namely Akanksha Tripathi, was solemnized with the applicant in the year 2015. After some time of marriage the applicant and his mother, started harassment of the his daughter for additional dowry. In this regard a complaint was lodged by her daughter being Case Crime Number 332 of 2024 and after entering into compromise, before the Court, his daughter started to live with the applicant. On 26.03.2025 being fed up from dowry demands the daughter of the first informant has committed suicide by hanging herself. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report was lodged after a delay of two days without any plausible explanation. In the post mortem report the cause of death has been mentioned 'Asphyxia as a result of Ante Mortem Hanging. First informant as well as his wife, in his statement has stated that the deceased herself has committed suicide. Applicant has no criminal antecedents and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail; hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

BAIL No. 26564 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant- Mayank Sharma , involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶19

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶20

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶21

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶22

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶23

(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)

¶24

September 23, 2025

¶25

Deepak/

¶26

Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mayank Sharma v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mayank Sharma v. State of U.P.

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