Allowed

Amardeep Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2024/15409/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Sections 436, 504, and 506 IPC regarding arson allegations, the High Court allowed bail. The court observed that evidence relied upon was limited to an inadmissible confession and that the applicant adequately explained his criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence or committing new crimes.

Amardeep Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:864

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15409 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Amardeep Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including upto date case diary of the case.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Amardeep Gautam for grant of bail, in Case Crime No.521 of 2023, under Sections 436, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gosainganj, District Lucknow, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶10

It is further submitted that F.I.R. of this case has been lodged on 14.11.2023 by the owner of the godown namely Gautam Bhatt against the applicant alleging that on 25.10.2023 some altercation had taken place between him and applicant, who was the driver in his company and thereafter on 11.11.2023 at about 06:00pm. the applicant informed his Manager namely Abhishek Singh that a fire had broken out in the godown of the informant and when he arrived at his godown, he found the same burnt. It is apprehended that the godown has been put on fire by the applicant.

¶11

Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that apart from apprehension and suspicion, there is no material collected by the investigating officer, which may connect the applicant with the crime. Elaborating further, it is submitted that apart from confessional statement of the applicant obtained while he was in the custody

¶12

of police and which could not be proved against him by virtue of the bar contained under Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, there is no material or evidence available against him and in fact it is a case, where there is no evidence/material at all.

¶13

It is next submitted that applicant is in jail in this case since 29.11.2023 and criminal history of three cases have been explained in para-13 of the bail application, charge-sheet in this case has already been submitted and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶14

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed an heinous offence and having regard to the material/evidence available against the applicant, he is not entitled to be released on bail, but could not controvert the other factual submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that in the F.I.R only an apprehension/suspicion has been shown by the informant that his godown might have been burnt by the applicant as an altercation had taken place between them and some days ago by making telephonic call to his Manager, the applicant had intimidated, however, apart from suspicion, which has been shown in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of the informant there is only confessional statement of the applicant, which has been obtained while he was in the custody of the police and which could not be proved against him by virtue of the bar contained under Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act. Chargesheet in this case has already been filed. Applicant is in jail in this case since 29.11.2023. Criminal history of three cases has been adequately explained. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶16

Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed .

¶17

Let the accused/applicant- Amardeep Gautam involved in above-mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶22

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶23

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 4.1.2024 Anupam S/-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amardeep Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amardeep Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangam Verma @ Sangam Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Om Prakash Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Satyam Pandey Alias Ashutosh Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Shahbaj Ahmad @ Sabloo Vs Sate of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Ram Prakash vs C.B.I. Anti Corruption Branch Lko.

Rahul Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. /Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and Another