Sumit Sharma vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Sumit Sharma vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS granted to applicant Sumit Sharma in respect of Case Crime No. 378/2023 (charges under sections 498A, 304B and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act).

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, who figures as the accused in Case Crime No. 378/2023 registered under sections 498A and 304B and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, should be granted anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS.

Court's answer

Guided by the considerations indicated by the Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 — the nature and gravity of the accusations, the apprehension of the accused tampering with evidence, the antecedents of the applicant, and his social and family standing — and taking into account that the accused had already been produced before the police on the basis of suspicion in the same case, the Court weighed the matter and found no particular reason to reject the anticipatory bail application.

Ratio / Principle

Since the accused had already been produced before the police in this very case on the basis of suspicion, no justification subsisted for effecting his arrest through the present anticipatory bail application.

Key takeaways

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the accused-applicant was allowed.ratio¶¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL — S.482 BNSS — ALLOWED (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; order dated 13.8.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:138881). Applicant Sumit Sharma sought anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 378/2023 registered under sections 498A and 304B (parent penal code abbreviation illegible in OCR) and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Counsel for the applicant urged that he was being proceeded against merely on the basis of accusation with an expectation of recovery although nothing incriminating stood against him, that this was his first offence, and undertook to cooperate with the investigation and appear before the court whenever required. It was submitted on the other side that the accused had in any event already been produced before the police on suspicion in the same case. Following the parameters laid down by the Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 (nature and gravity of accusation, antecedents of the applicant, possibility of absconding), Dr. Gautam Chowdhary, J., after balancing the gravity of the accusations, the apprehension of tampering, the applicant's antecedents and his social and family standing, found no justification for his arrest and no reason to reject the application, and allowed the anticipatory bail application. Police station and district names in the FIR line are illegible in the source text.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138881

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2140 of 2025

Applicant :- Sumit Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Irfan Chaudhary,Srijan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

वररममनदमणणणकपककररअगगमजममनरपमररनमपतआववदकककओरसव मम०अ०सस० 378/2023 अनरर धमरम 498 ए, 304 बबभम०दस०गव०वधमरम 3/4 दहवजपगरषवधअधधगनयम, रमनमकमणणलम, धजलमशममलबममअगगम जममनरपरममककरनवहवरमपसरमरगकयमरयमहह।

आववदककवगवदमनअधधवकमएवसगवदमनअपरशमसककयअधधवकमशब चनदनधससहककसमनमररमपतमवलबकमपररशबलनगकयम।

आववदककवगवदमनअधधवकमनवरकरपसरमरगकयमगकआववदकगनदरषहह, उसवउपरककधमरमओसममदवषवशरसरवपरवशमनकरनवककगनयरसवआधलपगकयम रयमहह, उसवआशसकमहहगकउसवउपरककवगर मममलवममगररफरमरगकयमजम सकरमहह, जबगकउसकवगवरदककईगवशवसनबयसमकयनहहहह।यहमसपमससगरक रथययहभबहहगकआववदकककइसमममलमममअसरररमआदवशपमपहह, धजसकम अनमपमलनगकयमजमरहमहह।आववदकककओरसवयहभबआशवमसनगदयमरयम हहगकवहकमन ककपगकयमममसहयकरकरनवकवधलएरहयमरहहऔरजबभब आवशयकरमहकरबवहईममनदमरबसवनयमयमलयकवसमकखमदककउपलबध करमएरमऔरउनसभबशररसककसवबकमरकरनवकवधलएभबरहयमरहहजक नयमयमलयउसपरअधधरकगपरकरवरब।

गवदमनअपरशमसककयअधधवकमदमरमयहरकरपसरमरगकयमरयमगक अगभयमकदमरमकमरररअपरमधरसभबरपककगरकमहहररमइसमममलमममअगभयमक कवगवरदपयमरपसमकयकवआधमरपरआरकपपतदमधखलगकयमजमचमकमहह

ररमअगभयमकककभनगमकमअगभयकजनसमकबररदमरमअगभकधररहह।इसधलए अगभयमकककअगगमजममनरपरममकगकयवजमनवकमककईऔगचतयपरबरनहह हकरहमहह।अरतअगभयमककमयहअगगमजममनरआववदनपतगनरसरगकयम जमय।

यहकहमजमसकरमहहगक Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 कवमममलवममममननबयउचचरम नयमयमलयनवममनमहहगकअगगमजममनरपरगनररयकररवसमयनयमयमलयकक आरकपककपककगरऔररसभबररम, अगभयमककमपनवरवकत, अगभयमककवनयमयसव भमरनवककससभमवनमपरगवचमरकरनमचमगहएररमनयमयमलयककअगभयमककव गवरदउपलबधससपनररसममगबकमसमवधमनबपनवरकमनलयमसकनकरनमचमगहएररम अगभयमकककसटबकभनगमकमककभबधयमनममरखनमचमगहए।

वररममनमममलवममअगगमजममनरससबसधबगवधधकवसरमगपरधसदमसरतकक धयमनममरखरवहहएऔरपककमरतकवगवदमनअधधवकमओसकवकरनत, आरकपतकक पककगर, आववदकककभनगमकमऔरमममलवकवसभबरथयतएवसपररणसरगरयतकक धयमनममरखरवहहए, चनसगकअगभयमककवगवरदपयमरपसमकयकवआधमरपर आरकपपतदमधखलगकयमजमचमकमहह।इसधलएमममलवकवरमर-दकषपरगबनम ककईगवचमरवयकगकएयहअगगमजममनरआववदनपतसवबकमरगकएजमनव यकगयनहहहह, रदनमसमरआववदककमअगगमजममनरआववदनपतअसवबकमर गकयमजमरमहह।

रदनमसमर, इसअगगमजममनरआववदनपतककगनरसरगकयमजमरमहह।

इसवमदममयगदककईअसरररमआदवशहक, रकवहसवरतसममपसमझमजमए।

कमयमरलयककगनदरगशरगकयमजमरमहहगकइसआदवशककएकपगरधलगप अगवलमबससबसधधरगवचमररनयमयमलयकवभवजनमसमगनणशचरकरम।

Order Date :- 13.8.2025 CP.sahani

Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA PRAKASH SAHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad