Allowed

Santosh Kumar Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2024BAIL/10564/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Allahabad High Court entertained a bail application filed by Santosh Kumar Gautam arrested under Section 409 I.P.C. for alleged embezzlement. Relying on settled Supreme Court precedents and noting the applicant was suspended and likely falsely implicated, the court allowed bail subject to personal bond, sureties, and conditions regarding presence in court.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to verification and conditions.

Santosh Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Corruption | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81810

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10564 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Verma,Manmohan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

The case is being heard through video conferencing.

¶7

Heard Sri Manmohan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Abhishek Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 39 of 2022, under Section 409 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

The applicant is stated to be the store incharge of the PCF Godown Pratapgarh and is stated to have usurped the 397.890 metric tone of urea and 24 litre of nano urea.

¶10

The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. He was already suspended at the relevant time when the said offence is stated to have committed, as such, he has no occasion to commit the said offence. Criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained in paragraph 24 of the affidavit filed with the bail application. The fundamental rights of the applicant stand in Article 21 of the Constitution of India stands violated. There is no likelihood of him absconding as he is a public servant.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.01.2022 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant- Santosh Kumar Gautam, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶17

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

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 6.12.2024 Priya

¶20

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Santosh Kumar Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Gautam v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Satyendra Pal vs State of U.P.

Nikki Rai Alias Nikki Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Ishrat Ali vs State of U.P.

Bhura @ Farman vs State of U.P. and Another

Hari Om Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Santosh Kumar Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.