Shivnath Gupta vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

Shivnath Gupta vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether enlargement on bail should be granted to accused-applicant Shivnath Gupta in Case Crime No. 512 of 2023 (Sections 302 and 201 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur) pursuant to the bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Court's answer

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the allegation levelled against the applicant, and taking note of the evidence including digital evidence collected through the mobile phone during investigation, the Court was not inclined to grant any indulgence to the applicant in the present bail application.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail rejected — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.; Order Date 9.7.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:109164). Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21048 of 2025 by Shivnath Gupta under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 sought bail in Case Crime No. 512 of 2023, Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur, under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC — concerning an unknown female aged about 35 years done to death in the intervening night of 19/20.9.2023, her body kept concealed in a sugarcane field, FIR lodged by the village Chowkidar against unknown person. Applicant, not named in the FIR and languishing in jail since 27.9.2023, had his name surfaced during investigation on the statement of independent witness Allanoor @ Nepali and the CDR of the mobile number. The learned AGA opposed, submitting that the applicant admitted his guilt, that the original laminated Aadhar card of the deceased and heavy cash (Rs.1,20,000/-) were recovered from his possession, and that witnesses and the CDR showed his closeness to the deceased; counsel for the applicant urged innocence, a planted recovery, and the inadmissibility of the confessional statement, noting it was a case of circumstantial evidence with no eye witness. Taking note of the evidence including digital evidence collected through the mobile phone, the Court declined to grant indulgence and the bail application was rejected.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109164

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21048 of 2025

Applicant :- Shivnath Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

Heard Shri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Purshottam Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accusedapplicant, Shivnath Gupta, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 512 of 2023, under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 27.9.2023. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that FIR giving rise to present case crime was lodged by village Chowkidar against unknown person regarding an incident alleged to have been taken place in the intervening night of 19/20.9.2023 wherein an unknown female aged about 35 years was done to death and her body was kept concealed in sugarcane field. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR. During course of investigation, his name surfaced on the record on the basis of statement of independent witness Allanoor @ Nepali and also from the CDR of mobile number. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no eye witness of the incident. It is a case of circumstantial evidence. The recovery of incriminating articles as well as money is planted one. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution case, applicant has confessed his guilt, but the confessional statement of the applicant cannot be read into evidence. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that applicant himself admitted his guilt causing murder of the deceased. There is a recovery of original laminated Aadhar card of deceased from the conscious possession of applicant including heavy cash amount etc. Applicant himself admitted that Rs.1,20,000/- recovered from his possession, was given by the deceased herself to him. Witnesses Duggal Singh and Parveen Kumar in their statement said that after the death of husband of deceased, applicant used to look after her and was in visiting terms with the deceased. The copy of CDR also reveals that applicant and deceased used to talk on mobile with each other. So the liability is fastened upon the applicant to prove his innocence, but he has failed to do so. Hence, bail application may be rejected.

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, allegation levelled against the applicant and taking note of the evidence including digital evidence collected through mobile phone during the course of investigation, the Court is not inclined to grant any indulgence to the applicant in the present bail application.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected .

Order Date :- 9.7.2025 Ravi Prakash

(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.)

Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad