Gautam vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Gautam vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional bail granted: applicant Gautam to be released on furnishing a personal bond and sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to the enumerated conditions (no tampering with evidence; compulsory personal presence on charge/trial/Section 313 CrPC-351 BNSS hearing dates; breach permitting cancellation of bail).

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Gautam, deserves to be released on bail, having regard to parity with the co-accused already enlarged on bail by this Court and the principles laid down in the cited Supreme Court/precedent materials.

Court's answer

Expressing no reservation about the principles laid down in the guidelines/orders of the Supreme Court relating to the CBI (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021), Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022 INSC 690) and N.H. Purohit v. Uttar Pradesh Sarkar (1993 CriLJ 938), and weighing the facts, circumstances and merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to bail.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety bond(s)/sureties to the satisfaction of the concerned (trial) court.

Key takeaways

Condition (i): the applicant shall not tamper with (meddle with) the evidence.ratio¶14
Condition (ii)(1)-(3): the applicant shall remain personally present before the trial court on the dates intimated/notified for commencement of trial proceedings, framing of charges, and hearing under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 BNSS.ratio¶15
If the applicant remains absent deliberately or for reasons beyond his control, he forfeits the concession and the officer proceeding against the accused is at liberty to initiate action under the relevant provisions against him for misusing the liberty of bail.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:21571 — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Krishan Pahal, J.; Order Date 14.2.2025), CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 3807 of 2025 (Gautam v. State of U.P.). Applicant, named in FIR No. 236 of 2024, Police Station Doghat, District Baghpat, under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 3(5), 103 and 109, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, sought regular bail; his co-accused had already been enlarged on bail by this Court on 6.12.2024 (Bail Application No. 43961 of 2024), the State conceded no factual distinction between them, and the applicant had no criminal history, being in custody since 07.11.2024. Relying on the principles in the Supreme Court guidelines relating to the CBI (MANU/SCOR/22410/2021), Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022 INSC 690) and N.H. Purohit alias Nanhu Purohit v. Uttar Pradesh Sarkar (1993 CriLJ 938), the Court held the applicant entitled to bail on parity: release on furnishing a personal bond and sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court, with conditions — no tampering with evidence; personal presence on dates fixed for commencement of trial, framing of charges and hearing under S.313 CrPC/351 BNSS (deliberate absence attracting action for misuse of bail liberty); breach of conditions entitling cancellation of bail; identity, status and residence of applicant and sureties to be verified/certified by the trial court before acceptance.