High CourtsSingle Bench

Archit Dixit And Another vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 12 August 2025 · Citation: (2025) 08 UK CK 0585

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 · Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — Section 323, 498A, 504, 506 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 344 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 464 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed by the applicants under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking anticipatory bail under Sections 323, 498A, 504, 506 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 3 and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in Case Crime No.73 of 2025, registered at Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2.

Heard Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Pradeep Lohani, learned Brief Holder for the State.

3.

Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate contended that the applicant no.1-Archit Dixit, the husband of the informant, and the applicant no.2-Smt. Archana Dixit, the mother-in-law of the informant, have been falsely implicated by the informant. The applicant no.1 is ready and willing to bring his wife (informant) to his house. Applicants are not convicted persons. They are permanent residents of District Bareilly (Uttar Pradesh), therefore, there is no possibility of their absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. Applicants were granted interim bail on 04.04.2025, and, the conditions of the interim bail have not been violated by them.

4.

As per the report of the Registry, notice has been served personally on the informant.

5.

There is no representation on behalf of the informant.

6.

Mr. Pradeep Lohani, Brief Holder has opposed the anticipatory bail application.

7.

Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

8.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and the order dated 04.04.2025, granting interim bail to the applicants, is made absolute. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants Archit Dixit and Smt. Archana Dixit, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(ii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case.

(iii) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

9.

It is made clear that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.