Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024ABAIL/2568/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interim order grants anticipatory bail to the applicants in a criminal case involving IPC offences and SC/ST allegations. The court found it a fit case considering the pending civil dispute, prior quashing of charges, and the applicants' undertaking to cooperate, subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail granted to be released forthwith upon arrest, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation, no tampering, no leaving India, and attendance in court.

Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Another vs State of U.P. Thru… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2568 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Gupta And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 125 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354(kha), 452, 427 of IPC, Police Station Mankapur, District Gonda.

¶7

Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the matter due to ulterior motive. He next submits that there was allegation of committing offence under the SC/ST Act, though the same was challenged and that part of the allegation was quashed by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2263 of 2023. He added that the whole story is false and concocted and all the family members are implicated for outraging the modesty of the victim, though no such incident has ever been taken place and because of enmity between the parties, as the civil dispute is already pending, the First Information Report has been lodged, so as to mount pressure over the applicants, so that they may not pursue their case before the civil court. He also added that the chargesheet has already been filed and there is no complaint that the applicants had ever not cooperated in the investigation proceeding. He next submits that the applicants undertake that they will always cooperate with the trial proceeding and would never abscond. He further submits that there is an acute apprehension that the police will arrest the applicants and therefore, they may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are not entitled for any relief.

¶9

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the allegation

¶10

against the applicants of committing the offence under the SC/ST Act which was quashed by this Court earlier; all the family members of the applicants are implicated with respect to outrage the modesty of the victim; the civil dispute between the parties is pending consideration; the chargesheet has already been filed in the matter and there is no complaint regarding non-cooperation of the applicants in the investigation proceeding, coupled with the fact that the applicants have undertaken to cooperate in the trial proceeding, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail.

¶11

Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicants, namely, Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Harishchandra Gupta , shall be released forthwith, in the event of their arrest, in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶13

(ii) that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶14

(iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶15

(iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶16

(v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶17

(vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶18

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

Let notice be issued to opposite party no. 2, returnable at an early date.

¶20

Steps be taken within a week.

¶21

If the steps are taken, the office shall proceed accordingly.

¶22

List/put up this matter in the third week of January, 2025.

¶23

In the meantime, learned counsel for the State as well as opposite party no. 2 shall file their counter affidavits.

¶24

Order Date :- 10.12.2024 kkv/

¶25

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Indra Prakash Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow

Shivam Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Guddu Rawat @ Shiv Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ankul Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Gudiya Khatoon vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Satyendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another