Gaurav Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49225

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2198 of 2025

Appellant :- Gaurav Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajat Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

As per Annexure No.CA-2 to the counter affidavit as also as per office report dated 20.08.2025, service of notice upon the opposite party No.2 is sufficient. However, when the case is taken up no one appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2. Learned AGA is present for the State.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 04.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi in Regular Bail Application No.1773/2025 arising out of Crime No.0073/2025, under Sections 64, 352, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(2)(V)a, 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Hariyawan, District - Hardoi.

¶10

While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant who has no criminal history and is in jail since 24.05.2025 is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

¶11

He further stated that it is apparent from the mode adopted to lodge the F.I.R. by the opposite party No.2 making allegations therein to attract the Sections 64, 352, 351(3) of BNS, registered as F.I.R. No.0073/2025, on 19.04.2025 at Police Station Hariyawan, District Hardoi, that with oblique purpose the same was lodged.

¶12

It is further submitted that the transcribed copy of conversation, annexed as Annexure No.5 to the appeal, of the concerned constable, husband of the victim/prosecutrix and the victim herself, would indicate that under the compelling

¶13

circumstances, i.e. to save her matrimonial life the victim/prosecutrix has lodged the F.I.R. against the appellant and his real brother. In continuation, it is next submitted that the husband of the victim/prosecutrix was of the view that the victim/prosecutrix is in cordial relation with the present appellant which is completely incorrect but for this reason the husband of the victim compelled the victim to lodged the F.I.R.

¶14

It is also submitted that no doubt the victim/prosecutrix has leveled the allegation against the appellant to attract the offence under Section 64 of BNS in the F.I.R. as also in the statement recorded before the Magistrate in terms of Section 183 of BNSS but to corroborate the allegation, there is no medical evidence available with the prosecution which ought to have been there as the F.I.R. is of 29.04.2025 and the victim was medically examined on 03.05.2025. In these circumstances, the appellant is entitled to be released on bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

¶16

Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents.

¶17

Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

¶18

Order dated 04.07.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi in Regular Bail Application No.1773/2025 arising out of Crime No.0073/2025, under Sections 64, 352, 351(3) of BNS and Section 3(2)(V)a, 3 (2) (V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Hariyawan, District - Hardoi, is hereby set aside.

¶19

Let the appellant - Gaurav Gupta be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶20

(i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶21

(ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶22

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶23

(v) The appellant 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.

¶24

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶25

(vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶26

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶27

In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶28

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶29

Order Date :- 21.8.2025

¶30

ML/-

¶31

Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gaurav Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Anchal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 10 Others

Tribhuwan Patel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Zahida Khatoon Vs Civil Judge (J.D) Ftc Women Atrocities Bahraich and 7 Others

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

Abhai Kumar Khandelwal and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Javed Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another