Deepak Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
1 MCRC-54432-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
th
ON THE 18 OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 54432 of 2025
DEEPAK SHARMA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Sameer Kumar Shrivastava - Advocate alongwith Shri Anand
Purohit - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Harish Sharma - Public Prosecutor for the State.
Shri Abhinav Bhargav - Advoate for the complainant.
ORDER
By invoking the inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has
been preferred by the petitioner, namely, Deepak Sharma, under Section 528
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (which corresponds to
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), seeking quashment of
the First Information Report dated 23.01.2025 bearing Crime No. 43 of 2025
registered at Police Station Hazira, District Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh), for
the offences punishable under Sections 80, 85, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom, including the charge-sheet and the criminal proceedings pending
in Sessions Trial No. 273 of 2025 before the learned trial Court.
As per prosecution story, on 27.12.2024, the informant Ravi Sharma,

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
2 MCRC-54432-2025
son of Ramesh Sharma, aged about 40 years, resident of Gadaipura, Hazira,

appeared at the police station and reported that his daughter-in-law, Pooja
Sharma, wife of Sachin Sharma, aged about 25 years, residing near
Pitambara Complex, A.B. Road, Gadaipura, Hazira, had consumed some
poisonous substance on 25.12.2024 at about 10:30 PM, due to which her
health deteriorated. Thereafter, her father-in-law, Hotam Sharma, admitted
her to Brahmani Hospital for treatment, where she had been undergoing
treatment. On 27.12.2024 at about 6:30 AM, the informant received a phone
call from his relative (fufa) Hotam Sharma informing him that Pooja’s
condition had worsened. The informant then reached Brahmani Hospital,
where at about 9:00 AM, the doctor examined her and declared her dead. On
the basis of the said report, a merg intimation No. 49/24 under Section 194
BNSS was registered at Police Station Hazira and taken up for inquiry.
During the inquiry, the inquest (panchanama) of the deceased, who was a
newly married woman, was conducted by Naib Tehsildar Suresh Yadav, and
a postmortem examination was carried out. Since the deceased was a newly
married woman, the merg inquiry was conducted by the City Superintendent
of Police, Maharajpura, Nagendra Singh Sikarwar. During the investigation,
statements of the informant Ravi Sharma, the deceased’s father Jitendra
Sharma, mother Usha Sharma, uncle Bijendra Sharma, cousin Gaurav
Sharma, maternal aunt Kavita Sharma, brothers Prashant Sharma and
Avdhesh Sharma, maternal uncle Manikant Sharma, as well as the husband
Sachin Sharma, father-in-law Hotam Sharma, and sister-in-law (nand) Renu
Sharma were recorded. Marriage card and photographs were collected and

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
3 MCRC-54432-2025
seizure memo was prepared. Upon overall investigation, it was found that the

deceased, newly married Pooja Sharma, was married to Sachin Sharma, son
of Hotam Sharma, resident of Gadaipura, Hazira, on 08.07.2022 as per
Hindu rites and customs. At the time of marriage, the bride’s family had
given dowry beyond their capacity, including household articles such as bed,
refrigerator, LED TV, utensils, gold ring, gold necklace, and Rs.5,00,000 in
cash. After about five months of marriage, the deceased was allegedly
subjected to physical and mental cruelty by her husband Sachin Sharma,
father-in-law Hotam Sharma, brother-in-law Deepak Sharma (present
petitioner), mother-in-law Meera Sharma, and sister-in-law Renu Sharma,
who demanded an additional Rs.10,00,000 in cash as dowry from her
parental home. Despite attempts by the deceased to explain and pacify them,
the harassment continued and intensified. Being distressed by the continuous
harassment and increasing dowry demands, the deceased Pooja Sharma,
within seven years of marriage, consumed a poisonous substance at her
matrimonial home in Gadaipura on 25.12.2024 at about 10:30 PM under
suspicious circumstances. She later died during treatment at Brahmani
Hospital, Hazira on 27.12.2024 at about 9:00 AM. Prima facie, the act was
found to constitute offences punishable under Sections 85, 85, and 3(5) of
the BNS. Accordingly, Crime No. 43/25 was registered against the husband
Sachin Sharma, father-in-law Hotam Sharma, mother-in-law Meera Sharma,
brother-in-law Deepak Sharma, and sister-in-law Renu Sharma, and
investigation was undertaken. During investigation, statements of witnesses
including the informant Ravi Sharma, the deceased’s father Jitendra Sharma,

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
4 MCRC-54432-2025
uncle Bijendra Sharma, mother Usha Sharma, brothers Prashant Sharma and

Avdhesh Sharma, cousin Gaurav Sharma, maternal uncle Manikant Sharma,
and maternal aunt Kavita Sharma were recorded, all of whom corroborated
the incident and allegations. It was further found that the accused persons had
removed the poisonous substance and its wrapper from the scene of
occurrence and cleaned the place, thereby causing disappearance of
evidence. On the date of incident, i.e., 25.12.2024, the husband Sachin
Sharma had allegedly spoken to the deceased on her mobile number from his
mobile number, and during that conversation, he mentally harassed her. It
was also established through mobile CDR tower location that the mother-in-
law Meera Sharma, father-in-law Hotam Sharma, and sister-in-law Renu
Sharma were present at the house at the time of incident and thereafter, and
the brother-in-law Deepak Sharma had also been continuously present in the
preceding days up to 24.12.2024. During this period, all the accused
allegedly subjected the deceased to physical and mental cruelty in connection
with dowry demand, as a result of which she consumed poison and died.
During the course of investigation, accused Renu Sharma (sister-in-
law) and Deepak Sharma (brother-in-law) were arrested on 01.04.2025 and
released on bail in compliance with anticipatory bail orders passed by this
Court. The husband Sachin Sharma was arrested on 06.04.2025 and sent to
judicial custody. The father-in-law Hotam Sharma was granted anticipatory
bail by this Court and the mother-in-law Meera Sharma was granted bail by
the Apex Court.
Upon completion of the investigation, on the basis of witness

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
5 MCRC-54432-2025
statements, postmortem report, spot map, seizure memos, arrests, CDR data,

identification evidence, and medical documents (bedhead ticket), sufficient
evidence was found against the accused persons—(1) Sachin Sharma
(husband), (2) Renu Sharma (sister-in-law), (3) present petitoner/Deepak
Sharma (brother-in-law), (4) Meera Sharma (mother-in-law), and (5) Hotam
Sharma (father-in-law) for offences punishable under Sections 80, 85, 3(5),
and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Accordingly, charge-sheet No. 164/25 dated 02.07.2025 was filed
before the competent court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the present case and the entire prosecution story, even if
taken at its face value, does not disclose the commission of any offence
against him. It is contended that the petitioner is merely the brother-in-law
(devar) of the deceased and has been arrayed as an accused only on the basis
of vague, omnibus, and general allegations without any specific role
attributed to him in connection with the alleged demand of dowry or
harassment.
It is further submitted that the petitioner is a Government servant
working as a Police Constable in Delhi Police and has been in service since
15.03.2022. Since his appointment, he has been posted in Delhi and is
discharging his official duties there which is evident from Annexure P/4 of
the petition. After joining service, the petitioner has been residing separately
and independently from his parental family at his place of posting. He has
taken independent accommodation at RZ-16, First Floor, Khasra No. 38,

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
6 MCRC-54432-2025
Sagarpur, New Delhi, where he has been continuously residing in connection

with his service obligations, which is evident from Annexure P/5 of the
petition. In view of such admitted factual position, the petitioner has no
concern, connection, or participation in the day-to-day affairs of his parental
house. The allegations levelled against him in the impugned FIR are,
therefore, wholly false, baseless, and motivated. It is argued that the
petitioner was not even present at the place of alleged occurrence and was
residing in Delhi in connection with his bonafide government duties.
It is further contended that on the date of the alleged incident, the
petitioner was duly performing his official duties as a Police Constable in
Delhi Police and was present at his place of posting. This fact has been duly
substantiated through information obtained under the Right to Information
Act, which clearly establishes that the petitioner was on active duty on the
relevant date and was nowhere near the place of occurrence. The said
material conclusively demonstrates that the petitioner could not have
participated in or been involved in the alleged incident, thereby rendering the
allegations against him entirely false and concocted.
It is further submitted that there is no material on record to establish
any proximate or direct act of instigation, abetment, or cruelty attributable to
the petitioner which could have compelled the deceased to take the extreme
step. The essential ingredients of the alleged offences are completely absent
insofar as the present petitioner is concerned. The statements recorded during
investigation are general in nature and do not disclose any specific overt act
on the part of the petitioner.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
7 MCRC-54432-2025
It is also argued that the petitioner has been implicated solely on

account of his relationship with the husband of the deceased, and there is a
growing tendency to implicate all family members in matrimonial disputes
without any specific allegations. The continuation of criminal proceedings
against the petitioner, in absence of any prima facie case, would amount to a
gross abuse of the process of law.
It is further submitted that the material collected during investigation,
including call detail records and other documents, does not in any manner
establish the involvement of the petitioner. Mere allegations without any
supporting evidence cannot form the basis for prosecution. The charge-sheet
has been filed in a mechanical manner without proper application of mind.
In such circumstances, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to
exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and quash the impugned FIR as well as all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, insofar as they relate to the
present petitioner.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State as well as the counsel for the
complainant has opposed the petition and prayed for its dismissal submitting
that the allegations made in the FIR and the material collected during
investigation clearly disclose the commission of cognizable offences. It is
contended that the deceased was subjected to continuous physical and mental
cruelty in connection with unlawful demand of dowry by all the accused
persons, including the present petitioner, and such harassment ultimately led
her to take the extreme step within seven years of marriage. The statements

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
8 MCRC-54432-2025
of the prosecution witnesses, including the parents and close relatives of the

deceased, consistently support the prosecution case and specifically implicate
the petitioner. It is further submitted that the investigation has been carried
out in accordance with law and sufficient material has been collected,
including witness statements, call detail records, and other documentary
evidence, which prima facie establish the involvement of the petitioner in the
alleged offence. The contention of the petitioner regarding separate residence
and absence from the place of occurrence is a matter of defence, which
cannot be adjudicated at this stage while exercising inherent jurisdiction.
Such disputed questions of fact require appreciation of evidence and can only
be examined during trial. At this stage, when a prima facie case is made out
against the petitioner, this Court ought not to exercise its inherent powers to
quash the proceedings. It is thus prayed that the present petition being devoid
of merits is liable to be dismissed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and upon
perusal of the record, this Court finds substance in the submission that the
petitioner is a Government servant serving as a Police Constable in Delhi
Police and has been residing separately at his place of posting since his
appointment in the year 2022. The documents placed on record, including the
appointment letter, rent agreement, and information obtained under the Right
to Information Act, prima facie establish that the petitioner was not residing
at the matrimonial home of the deceased and was performing his official
duties in Delhi at the relevant point of time. The said material creates a
serious doubt regarding the presence and involvement of the petitioner in the

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
9 MCRC-54432-2025
alleged incident.

This Court further finds that the present petitioner has been implicated
in the matter primarily on the basis of omnibus and general allegations
without there being any specific role attributed to him. The material available
on record does not disclose any direct or proximate act of cruelty,
harassment, or instigation on the part of the petitioner which could be said to
have driven the deceased to commit suicide. The essential ingredients
required to constitute the alleged offences are conspicuously absent insofar
as the present petitioner is concerned.
It is well settled that the inherent powers of this Court are to be
exercised to prevent abuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of
justice. In the present case, continuation of criminal proceedings against the
petitioner, in absence of any specific allegations or cogent material, would
amount to abuse of the process of law. The implication of the petitioner
appears to be a result of his relationship with the other accused persons
rather than any active involvement in the alleged offence.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and in the light of
settled legal principles governing the exercise of inherent jurisdiction, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the present case is a fit one where
such powers deserve to be exercised.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The FIR dated
23.01.2025 bearing Crime No. 43 of 2025 registered at Police Station
Hazira, District Gwalior (M.P.) for offences under Sections 80, 85, 238 and
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as all consequential

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:9746
10 MCRC-54432-2025
proceedings arising therefrom, including the charge-sheet and the

proceedings pending in Sessions Trial No. 273 of 2025, are hereby quashed
insofar as they relate to the present petitioner.
The petition stands allowed and disposed of accordingly.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT
GWALIOR,
2.5.4.20=b864d1ab4ace2215bfcf3ab301c34d631287f1b1cd
d90b4a49f265f02d9d593f, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR,CID - 7064434,
postalCode=474001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
serialNumber=61b9d129971d2ea4fd4455ed49ea436ea65e2
6164beeed89153191c56e98ce21, cn=PAWAN KUMAR
Date: 2026.03.18 18:52:53 +05'30'
pwn*