Created by Fuzzy Cloud

DP Act

10 judgments · newest first · showing 1–10

JITENDRA KUMAR VERMA AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash a charge sheet and cognizance order relating to offences under sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the BNSS and sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act. The applicants asserted that they had reached a compromise with the …

HARIKESH AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

Petitioners Harikesh and three others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking (i) a writ of certiorari to quash an FIR dated 01‑02‑2026 registered under sections 85, 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of the B.N.S 2023 and sections 3/4 of the DP Act, and (ii) a writ of …

WARISversusSTATE OF U.P.

The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Waris, who was accused in a homicide case (Crime No. 412 of 2025) involving the death of his sister‑in‑law. Waris argued that he was implicated solely on false allegations, had no involvement in the family dispute, and had been in …

ANJEEV SAHARAN AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

The applicants filed an application under Section 529 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking a court order directing the Civil Judge (JD)/F.T.C.-I (CAW) in Ghaziabad to decide Complaint Case No.2020 of 2024, which had been pending since 2024 without any substantive hearing. The …

MD. IMTIYAZversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL REJECTED

The petitioner, Md. Imtiyaz, was charged under Sections 103(1), 85 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with Sections 3 and 4 of the DP Act for alleged dowry‑related torture and the death of his wife. He sought regular bail, asserting a clean antecedent, that the informant was not an eye‑witness and that …

Pravesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Petitioner Pravesh Kumar sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a dowry harassment case (Deoriya P.S. Case No. 221 of 2024) involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the DP Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and others assaulted the victim to demand dowry. The …

Sabita Kumari @ Sabita DeviversusThe State of Bihar

DISPOSED

The petitioner, Sabita Kumari, a government servant, applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act alleging recovery of 1.5 litres of liquor from her government quarters. She contended that the complaint was filed by her son‑in‑law, an Inspector …

Santosh Pasi @ Santosh BaheliyaversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Santosh Pasi applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a dowry harassment case (Ara Mahila P.S. Case No. 24 of 2025) under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the DP Act. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. Relying on the Supreme …

Md. Sajib Khan @ Md. Sajeev KhanversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

The petitioner, Md. Sajib Khan, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in Mahila Police Station Case No. 60 of 2024, which involved offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the DP Act. Both parties informed the court that the dispute had been settled through the …

Rupesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

BAIL GRANTED

Rupesh Kumar applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a complaint case (No. 261C of 2024) filed under IPC sections 115(2), 109, 85, 305 and Section 3 of the DP Act. He claimed innocence and alleged false implication. The court, relying on the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. …