Allowed

Amit Gupta Alias Kallu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2023CRLA/6236/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, in a criminal appeal, set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail for the appellant. The Court relied on Supreme Court precedent to grant limited-term bail, emphasizing that the trial court failed to properly consider the appellant's submissions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted for limited period upon producing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions.

Amit Gupta Alias Kallu Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:183462

¶2

Court No. - 85

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6236 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Amit Gupta Alias Kallu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Raj Kumar Tiwari,Lok Nath Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Afzal Ali

¶5

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶6

As per office report notice has been served on opposite party no. 2 personally.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for opposite party no.1, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 02.05.2023 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Firozabad in second anticipatory bail application no. 1635 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 86 of 2019, under Sections 342, 376, 420, 506 of IPC and under Section 3(2) 5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Matsaina, District Firozabad.

¶9

As per the FIR the allegations are made against Aman with whom the prosecutrix was forcefully married by Jagdish Prashad and Anek Singh. On the basis of fraud grandfather of the prosecutrix the present appellant along-with other accused persons took away the prosecutrix to some other place and it is alleged that in the assistance of present appellant Aman committed rape with her.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of the fact that he is brother-in-law of the main accused Aman. He submitted that victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C did not make any allegation that appellant had committed rape with her. Initially after investigation a final report was submitted by the Investigating Officer and the appellant is summoned after rejecting it to face the trial. It is case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of S.C/S.T. Act. It has been stated that appellant is having apprehension of imminent arrest and that

¶11

appellant has no criminal history to his credit and that in case, he is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the Investigation.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. assisted by the learned counsel for the respondent have supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant but he could not dispute the aforesaid factual aspects of the matter.

¶13

It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the trial court has not properly considered the case of the appellant. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the trial court dated 02.5.2023 is, hereby, set aside.

¶14

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the appellant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case for the limited period considering the exception considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶15

In the even of arrest of the appellant Amit Gupta @ Kallu , shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of charge sheet in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶16

(i) The appellant 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

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

¶19

(iv) The appellant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶20

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶21

The criminal appeal is allowed.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.9.2023 PS

¶23

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Gupta Alias Kallu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Gupta Alias Kallu 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

Mohd. Aasim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sudama Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Giri Vs State of U.P.and Another

Shri Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Deepa and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Prakash Solanki Vs State of U.P. and Another