Sandeep Gupta Alias Sanju vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1240 of 2025

Appellant :- Sandeep Gupta Alias Sanju Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Appellant :- Rajeev Mishra,Mool Shankar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,Susheel Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Rajeev Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A.and Shri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav,learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

¶7

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Faizabad/Ayodhya in Case Crime No.61 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 61(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2) V of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Poorakalandar, District- Faizabad/Ayodhya.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 02.02.2025 against unknown persons, stating that the informant's father used to work as a Watchman in an under construction marriage lawn. Some unknown persons attacked him with sticks and iron rods at about 01:00 PM on 02.02.2025 due to which he fell unconscious. The informant got knowledge of the incident through a Meson namely Raju @ Mishtri @ Raju Mishtri whereupon the injured person was admitted to the District Hospital where he died.

¶9

The postmortem examination report discloses the cause of death to be shock and hemorrhage due to ante-mortem blunt injuries.

¶10

Although the incident was not witnessed by any person, but during investigation, the informant expressed a suspicion that the deceased was working as a Watchman due to which the applicant and other persons could not commit theft of any material from site and they killed the deceased for this reason. Another son of the deceased Basant Lal also gave a similar statement.

¶11

The police claimed to have arrested three named personsShiv Shankar Dubey, Shubhankar Mishra and Pawan Singh, who confessed to have killed the deceased. Thereafter, the police arrested the applicant alongwith one Raju @ Mishtri @ Raju Mishtri and both of them confessed their involvement in

¶12

hatching a conspiracy for killing the deceased.

¶13

7.Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. He further submits that in the confession of the co-accused, role assigned to the appellant is only of watching but without considering it, learned court below has rejected the bail application of the applicant. He further submits that the appellant is languishing in jail since 06.02.2025 and in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty granted by this Court and assist the trial court in early disposal of trial.He further submits that the appellant shall cooperate in trial and undertakes to assist the trial court in early disposal of trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A.has vehemently opposed the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the allegations have been established during investigation. However, he could not contradict the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the appellant.

¶15

Learned counsel for the informant has also opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicant has confessed about his involvement in hatching the conspiracy and he had the motive for commission of the offence, therefore, the court below has rightly dismissed the bail application of the appellant. The appeal has been filed on misconceived and baseless grounds, which is liable to be dismissed.

¶16

10.Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it is apparent that the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown persons on the basis of information of the incident provided by one Raju @ Mishtri @ Raju Mishtri. While lodging the F.I.R.no suspicion has been expressed in it against the applicant but in the statement of the co-accused name of the applicant has surfaced. However, he has been assigned only the role of watching and in hatching the conspiracy. However no incriminating material has been recovered on pointing out of the appellant and the appellant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 06.02.2025, whereas the investigation already stands concluded and the co-accused having similar role has been granted bail by means of the order dated 01.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3686 of 2025(Raju @ Mishtri @ Raju Mishtri versus State of U.P. and the allegations of S.C./S.T. could not be said to be made out at this stage and the court below has passed the impugned order without considering the same, which is liable to be set aside and the case for bail of the appellant is made out.

¶17

The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act,Faizabad/Ayodhya, is hereby set aside.

¶18

Let the appellant-Sandeep Gupta Alias Sanju involved in the 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:-

¶19

(i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶20

(ii) The appellant 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 269 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶21

(iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶22

(iv) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶23

(v) If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant 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.

¶24

Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Akanksha Sri/-

¶25

Digitally signed by :- AKANKSHA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sandeep Gupta Alias Sanju v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Gupta Alias Sanju v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

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

Sarita Saroj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Master Vishwam Dwivedi Thru. His Maternal Granfather/Next Friend Sharda Prasad Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 5 Others

Sandhya Yadav Thru. Her Next Friend/Husband Pradumm Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Jagat Narain and 2 Others vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Chaitanya Sharma Under Guardianship of Mother Smt. Manisha Sharma and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

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