Dipu Gupta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

: Amitesh Pratap Singh, Abhijeet P. Singh Chauhan, Akar Srivastava, Ashutosh Goswami, Manoj Kumar : G.A., Katyayan Mishra, Sanjay Awasthi Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State is taken on record. Vide order dated 07.08.2025, the notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per the office report dated 03.09.2025, the notice has been served upon opposite party no. 2. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter affidavit has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Case Crime No. 380 of 2024, under Section 69 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant, who is 2 CRLA No. 2402 of 2025 in jail since 16.04.2025 and has no criminal history, has been falsely implicated in the instant case and the entire story against the appellant, indicated by the victim that the appellant established the physical relations with the victim on the pretext of marriage, is false and concocted. He further submits that the First Information Report is completely false and concocted and if it is true then it is a case of consent as the physical relations were established by the appellant with the victim with her consent. He further submits that the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case are extremely bleak in view of the law related to establishing relationship on the pretext of false promise of marriage. He further submitted that even the case set up in the FIR is not supported by medical evidence. He next submits that the appellant undertakes that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it is apparent that appellant is languishing in jail since 16.04.2025 and has no criminal history; the physical relations were established by the appellant with the victim on her consent; the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case are extremely bleak in view of the law related to establishing relationship on the pretext of false promise of marriage; the case set up in the FIR is not supported by medical evidence; the appellant has undertaken that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial. Without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has 3 CRLA No. 2402 of 2025 failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Case Crime No. 380 of 2024, under Section 69 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Dipu Gupta be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall 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.PC. 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 4 CRLA No. 2402 of 2025 As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) 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(s) made in this order. October 9, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

: Amitesh Pratap Singh, Abhijeet P. Singh Chauhan, Akar Srivastava, Ashutosh Goswami, Manoj Kumar : G.A., Katyayan Mishra, Sanjay Awasthi Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Counter affidavit filed today by learned Counsel for the State is taken on record. Vide order dated 07.08.2025, the notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per the office report dated 03.09.2025, the notice has been served upon opposite party no. 2. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter affidavit has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Case Crime No. 380 of 2024, under Section 69 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant, who is 2 CRLA No. 2402 of 2025 in jail since 16.04.2025 and has no criminal history, has been falsely implicated in the instant case and the entire story against the appellant, indicated by the victim that the appellant established the physical relations with the victim on the pretext of marriage, is false and concocted. He further submits that the First Information Report is completely false and concocted and if it is true then it is a case of consent as the physical relations were established by the appellant with the victim with her consent. He further submits that the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case are extremely bleak in view of the law related to establishing relationship on the pretext of false promise of marriage. He further submitted that even the case set up in the FIR is not supported by medical evidence. He next submits that the appellant undertakes that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it is apparent that appellant is languishing in jail since 16.04.2025 and has no criminal history; the physical relations were established by the appellant with the victim on her consent; the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case are extremely bleak in view of the law related to establishing relationship on the pretext of false promise of marriage; the case set up in the FIR is not supported by medical evidence; the appellant has undertaken that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial. Without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has 3 CRLA No. 2402 of 2025 failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Case Crime No. 380 of 2024, under Section 69 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Dipu Gupta be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall 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.PC. 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 4 CRLA No. 2402 of 2025 As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) 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(s) made in this order. October 9, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench