Allowed

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC28 Mar 2024BAIL/2804/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for bail in a case under sections 409 and 420 IPC. The applicant, along with two co-accused, was falsely implicated. While the all-indian grounds oppose the grant of bail, they concede that the similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail. The High Court allowed the bail application based on parity. The applicant was released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties

What did the court decide?

The applicant Santosh Gupta was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to several conditions regarding his conduct and appearance in court.

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49702

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2804 of 2024 Applicant :- Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime/FIR No.752 of 2020, under Sections 409/420 I.P.C., Police Station-Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case and he is in jail since 10.08.2021. He further submitted that the applicant is having previous criminal history of 69 cases and in 41 cases, he has been granted bail (bail orders in 39 cases have been annexed with the supplementary affidavit filed today). He further submitted that co-accused, namely, Ajay Prakash Upadhyay and Vishnu Gupta have already been granted bail by this Court, vide orders dated 11.05.2023 and 10.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.3002 of 2023 and 8000 of 2023 respectively. In these circumstances, the applicant is also entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

During course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant placed before this Court a photocopy of bail orders of coaccused, namely, Ajay Prakash Upadhyay and Vishnu Gupta is taken on record.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but has fairly conceded that similarly situated coaccused Ajay Prakash Upadhyay and Vishnu Gupta have already been granted bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. and going through the record as well as order of co-accused, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case for bail. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

Let the applicant- Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta, 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.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

(ii) The applicant 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.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶16

(iv) 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 IPC.

¶17

(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶18

(vi) 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 23.7.2024 V. Sinha

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Manjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vishal @ Atul Verma Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Anees @ Ganja Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ashish Rajpoot vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rajesh Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 4 Others

Dinesh Kumay Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.