Allowed

Smt. Nikhat Parveen v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2025NABAIL/9228/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application by the mother-in-law of the victim in a dowry-related case. The court granted bail till the end of trial, imposing a non-cognizable bond with sureties and conditions to cooperate in the trial and not leave the country.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till the end of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties and abiding by specified conditions.

Smt. Nikhat Parveen vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9228 of 2025

¶3

Smt. Nikhat Parveen

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

.....Opposite

¶8

Party(s)

¶9

Counsel for Applicant(s):Gulshad Ali, Syed Ahmed
Faizan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s):G.A.
Court No. - 71

¶10

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on
record.

¶12

2. This application has been moved on behalf of the
applicant - Smt. Nikhat Parveen seeking anticipatory bail
in Case Crime No.46 of 2025, under Sections 85 BNS and
3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kareili, District
Prayagraj.

¶13

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶14

4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicant that applicant is mother-in-law (Saas) of the
lady victim and she is innocent and has apprehension of
arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no
credible evidence against her. Allegations levelled
against the applicant are false. The investigation of the
case has been completed and now charge-sheet has been
filed. No specific role has been assigned to the present
applicant in the alleged crime. It is also submitted that
vide order dated 6.5.2025 passed by a Division Bench of
this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 8907 of
2025 the matter was referred to mediation and
conciliation centre of this Court and the petitioners in
the said writ petition including the present applicant
were granted interim relief. It is also submitted that
mediation has failed in the matter. It has been submitted

¶15

NABAIL No. 9228 of 2025

¶16

¶17

that in case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she
will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate
in the investigation and would obey all conditions of
bail.

¶18

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory
bail.

¶19

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

7. It appears that the applicant was granted interim
protection in aforesaid Criminal Misc. Writ Petition and
no instance of misuse of the said liberty has been
brought the to notice of this Court. Applicant was
cooperative during investigation. No custodial
interrogation is required in the matter.

¶21

8. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of
Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex
Court has settled the law on the subject finally by
holding that the anticipatory bail need not be of limited
duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue
upto conclusion of trial.

¶22

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail
granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the
accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till
end of trial.

¶23

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that
while considering an application for grant of
anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature
of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of
his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering
with evidence including intimidating witnesses,
likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the
country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought
to be generally guided by considerations such as the
nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed
to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while
considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse
it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶24

9. Considering the settled principles of law regarding

¶25

NABAIL No. 9228 of 2025

¶26

¶27

anticipatory bail, nature of accusation, role of
applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of
the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory
bail to the applicant till the end of trial.

¶28

10. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶29

11. In the event of arrest of the applicant, she shall
be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a
personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned with the following conditions:-

¶30

(i) The applicant shall make herself available before the
Court concerned on the date fixed in the matter and will
cooperate in the trial.

¶31

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make
any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any
police office.

¶32

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the
previous permission of the Court and if she has passport,
the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P.
Concerned.

¶33

12. In case of default of any of the conditions, the
same may be a ground for cancellation of protection
granted to the applicant.

¶34

November 18, 2025
safi

¶35

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶36

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Nikhat Parveen v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nikhat Parveen v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Singh vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Patel vs State of U.P.

Shivam Gurjar vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhaniram @ Chhote Verma vs State of U.P.

Avanish Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintu Yadav Alias Kaushal Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another