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

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:81895

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7912 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,Pankaj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

1. Heard.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime/FIR No.120 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and he is in jail since 10.08.2021. He further submits that the applicant was employee in the company and he was neither a Director, Manager nor Proprietor of the company.

¶8

4.He further submitted that the applicant is having criminal antecedent of 69 cases of identical allegations, out of which in 41 cases he is already on bail, details of which has been explained in para 2 of the Supplementary Affidavit. He further submits that co-accused - Dharmendra Kaushal, having identical role, has already been granted bail by this Court, vide order dated 31.05.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7269 of 2023. He further submits that charge sheet has been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of evidence. 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

Learned A.G.A. has opposes the prayer of the applicant for grant of bail and submits that during the course of investigation, involvement of the applicant was found in the present case but does not dispute this fact that charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in jail since 10.08.2021 and concedes that having identical role, co-accused - Dharmendra Kaushal has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶10

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents, bail order of the co-accused - Dharmendra Kaushal, ground of parity as well as totality of fact and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled

¶11

to be released on bail.

¶12

Let applicant - Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of 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 :- 6.12.2024/Arvind

¶21

Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA 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?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Kunwar Abhishek Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Sunil Kumar Srivastava and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Kanteshwar Mohan Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. and 4 Others

Rajeev Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt of Home Lko and Another

Atul Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others