Allowed

Satyam Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2022BAIL/47118/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding prosecution under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, the single judge observed allegations of false FIR and planted evidence. The court allowed bail on a personal bond and two local sureties, imposing strict conditions regarding court attendance, adjournments, and misuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties of the like amount.

Satyam Gupta Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47118 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satyam Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Agrahari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Agrahari, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Shravan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Satyam Gupta a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 147 of 2022, under Sections 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station-Raipura, District-Chiktrakoot, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per the prosecution version as unfolded in the first information report, on 9th August,2022, when the informant along with other Police Personnels were checking the vehicles to catch the miscreants, on suspicion, the applicant and other four other persons were arrested and recovered country made pistol of 315 bore with one bullet and other articles.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present first information report lodged by the Police is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging his name in a fake, false and frivolous case. The entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected by the informant. It is also argued that the alleged recovery is planted one by the Police. There is also no independent or public witness of the alleged recovery. The applicant is a student of graduation and has no concern with the present case nor was present at the place. There is no direct or indirect evidence for which it can be said that the present applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 10th August, 2022.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on

¶11

record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 19.11.2022 Sushil/-

¶19

Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.21 12:38:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyam Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyam Gupta v. State of U.P.

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

Aleem Vs State of U.P.

Jeeshan @ Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Daulat Vs State of U.P.

Akash Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shatrughan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Hari Mohan @ Tunda Vs State of U.P.