Radhey Shyam Gupta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

3. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 16.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hardoi in Bail Application No. 2437 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 623 of 2019 under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 323, 326, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. and Sections- 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5)A, 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kotwali Sahar, District- Hardoi.

4. It is stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. Further stated that co-accused persons namely Shikhar Singh, Satyam and 2 CRLA No. 291 of 2022 Shalini Gupta @ Dali Gupta & Shivani Gupta, similarly situated, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in terms of orders dated

28.07.2021, 28.07.2021 and 18.08.2021 passed in CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 343 of 2020, 340 of 2020 and 585 of 2021. Relevant portion of the order dated 18.08.2021 passed in the case of co-accused/Shalini Gupta @ Dali Gupta & Shivani Gupta is extracted here-in-under:- "Learned counsel for appellants has submitted that the appellants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid crime. Further submission is that FIR of this case was lodged by complainant Ajay Pal, who is the uncle of the deceased - Monu. Learned counsel for appellant has further submitted that the complainant is not the eyewitness of the incident. Next submission is that no specific role has been mentioned in the FIR against the appellants. Initially FIR of this case was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 326, 504 & 506 IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act. During investigation, statement of injured (now deceased) was recorded by the Investigating Officer in which the name of the appellants were not disclosed by the deceased and the said statements were treated as dying declaration. Learned counsel for appellants has further submitted that co-accused Satyam has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.07.2021 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 340 of 2020. The appellants are in jail since 17.09.2019. The applicants have no criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that if the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial. Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order, hence the applicants are not entitled for bail and the appeals are liable to be dismissed. After hearing the rival submissions of the parties, and perused the record, without expressing any opinion on merits, I fine that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant/applicant. Impugned order dated 19.02.2021 is hereby set aside. Both the aforesaid appeals are hereby allowed. Let appellants (Shalini Gupta alias Dali Gupts and Shivani Gupta) be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-"

6. In these circumstances, the appellant, who is in jail since 17.09.2019, is also entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the 3 CRLA No. 291 of 2022 appeal is liable to be allowed.

7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons, named above, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

8. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as also that co-accused persons, named above, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

9. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances as also 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.

10. The order dated 16.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hardoi in Bail Application No. 2437 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 623 of 2019 under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 323, 326, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. and Sections- 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5)A, 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kotwali Sahar, District- Hardoi, is hereby set aside.

11. Let the appellant- Radhey Shyam 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 :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. 4 CRLA No. 291 of 2022 (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (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.

12. 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. September 19, 2025 Arun/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

3. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 16.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hardoi in Bail Application No. 2437 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 623 of 2019 under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 323, 326, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. and Sections- 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5)A, 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kotwali Sahar, District- Hardoi.

4. It is stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. Further stated that co-accused persons namely Shikhar Singh, Satyam and 2 CRLA No. 291 of 2022 Shalini Gupta @ Dali Gupta & Shivani Gupta, similarly situated, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in terms of orders dated

28.07.2021, 28.07.2021 and 18.08.2021 passed in CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 343 of 2020, 340 of 2020 and 585 of 2021. Relevant portion of the order dated 18.08.2021 passed in the case of co-accused/Shalini Gupta @ Dali Gupta & Shivani Gupta is extracted here-in-under:- "Learned counsel for appellants has submitted that the appellants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the aforesaid crime. Further submission is that FIR of this case was lodged by complainant Ajay Pal, who is the uncle of the deceased - Monu. Learned counsel for appellant has further submitted that the complainant is not the eyewitness of the incident. Next submission is that no specific role has been mentioned in the FIR against the appellants. Initially FIR of this case was lodged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 326, 504 & 506 IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act. During investigation, statement of injured (now deceased) was recorded by the Investigating Officer in which the name of the appellants were not disclosed by the deceased and the said statements were treated as dying declaration. Learned counsel for appellants has further submitted that co-accused Satyam has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.07.2021 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 340 of 2020. The appellants are in jail since 17.09.2019. The applicants have no criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that if the applicants are released on bail, they would not misuse liberty of bail and is ready to co-operate in the trial. Learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order, hence the applicants are not entitled for bail and the appeals are liable to be dismissed. After hearing the rival submissions of the parties, and perused the record, without expressing any opinion on merits, I fine that it is a fit case for grant of bail of appellant/applicant. Impugned order dated 19.02.2021 is hereby set aside. Both the aforesaid appeals are hereby allowed. Let appellants (Shalini Gupta alias Dali Gupts and Shivani Gupta) be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-"

6. In these circumstances, the appellant, who is in jail since 17.09.2019, is also entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the 3 CRLA No. 291 of 2022 appeal is liable to be allowed.

7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons, named above, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

8. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as also that co-accused persons, named above, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

9. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances as also 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.

10. The order dated 16.12.2020 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hardoi in Bail Application No. 2437 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 623 of 2019 under Sections- 147, 148, 149, 323, 326, 504, 506, 302 I.P.C. and Sections- 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5)A, 3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kotwali Sahar, District- Hardoi, is hereby set aside.

11. Let the appellant- Radhey Shyam 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 :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. 4 CRLA No. 291 of 2022 (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (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.

12. 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. September 19, 2025 Arun/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench