Babu Prasad Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2593 of 2024

Appellant :- Babu Prasad Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- Naveen Kumar Pandey,Kusuma Devi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ashutosh Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

[Criminal Misc. Application No. 1 (B) of 2024]

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant/appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶8

The instant bail application has been moved by the appellant/applicant, namely, Babu Prasad Gupta, who is convict of Sessions Trial No. 299 of 2022; State Vs. Suresh Kumar Gupta and another, arising out of Case Crime No. 24 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Motiganj, District Gonda, and sentenced for maximum term of 8 years of rigorous imprisonment pertaining to Section 304-B IPC with fine stipulation, vide judgment and order dated 31.07.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gonda, praying to release him on bail, during pendency of the instant appeal.

¶9

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant/appellant that the applicant/appellant is about 80 years of age and he is father-in-law and he was not involved in committing the offence and this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the learned trial court. He also submits that there is no anti-mortem injuries over the body of the injured, as per post-mortem report and there is no cogent evidence that the applicant/appellant was involved in committing such offence. He added that the applicant/appellant was on bail during trial and he never misused the liberty of bail and the applicant/appellant has no previous criminal history. He added that the appellant is in jail since 31.07.2024 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted to him and would cooperate in the hearing of the appeal. Thus, submission is that the applicant/appellant may be enlarged on bail during pendency of the appeal.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there is no erroneousness in the judgment and order passed by the learned trial court. He also submits that the applicant/appellant is named in the First Information Report and after thorough investigation, the chargesheet has been filed. He further submits that the learned trial court has found that the applicant/appellant is involved in committing the offence and found cogent piece of evidence and, therefore, convicted the applicant/appellant. Thus, no interference is warranted by this Court.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant/appellant is 80 years of age, therefore, the ratio of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Anil ARI Vs. State of West Bengal reported in [(2009) 11 SCC 363] would applicable in this case; further the applicant/appellant is father-in-law and there seems other perversity in the judgment and order of the trial court; the applicant/applicant was on bail during trial and he did not misuse the liberty of the same; the applicant/appellant is languishing in jail since 31.07.2024 having no previous criminal history to his credit and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail, if granted, therefore, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶12

In result, the bail application of the applicant/appellant is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant/appellant- Babu Prasad Gupta, involved in aforesaid case, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The fine, imposed by the trial court, shall be deposited by the applicant/appellant within a period of one month from his actual release from prison, if the same is not earlier deposited.

¶15

(ii) The applicant/appellant shall cooperate in early disposal of the appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶16

(iii) The applicant/appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being

¶17

released on bail.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court concerned shall transmit the photostat copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record.

¶20

[Order on Appeal]

¶21

List/put up this appeal in the week commencing 06th October, 2025.

¶22

Order Date :- 13.8.2025 kkv/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Babu Prasad Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Prasad 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

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

Ram Shankar Maurya and 5 Others vs Deputy Director of Consolidation Balrampur and 4 Others

Hawaldar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Geology and Mining Govt. Lko and 3 Others

Vinay Kumar Sharma Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Rajesh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Suneel @ Suneel Bajpai vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others