Allahabad High Court
Sarvesh Patharkat vs State Of U.P. on 8 July, 2021
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- BAIL No. - 6974 of 2021
Applicant :- Sarvesh Patharkat
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- O.P. Tiwari,Rajendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Learned counsel for the bail-applicant Sri O.P. Tiwari, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State Sri Prem Prakash, Advocate are connected through video conferencing.
2. The present bail application is filed on behalf of the accused-applicant-Sarvesh Patharkat, involved in Case Crime No.183 of 2021, under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, registered at Police Station Makhi, District Unnao.
3. The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of bail plea of applicant by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.12, POCSO Act-IInd, Unnao vide order dated 24.06.2021.
4. Learned A.G.A. for the State informs that he has received the instructions alongwith C.D. and material papers from the prosecution. Since the learned counsel for the bail-applicant presses to argue the matter instantly, therefore, learned A.G.A. is also ready to protest the bail-plea.
5. Learned counsel for the bail-applicant submitted that the prosecution case is that the accused-applicant was caught in possession with 8 Kg. of Ganja.
6. Learned counsel for the bail-applicant argued that the present accused-applicant has neither been involved in criminal case for criminal antecedent and so far as, the F.I.R. version is concerned, it is only false implication for the reason of outgoing election of the gram pradhan, political rivalry led to falsely implication of present accused-applicant. Learned counsel further submitted that moreover, the contraband allegedly recovered from the possession of present accused-applicant is much less than commercial quantity which makes offence bailable.
7. Learned A.G.A. further submitted that the contraband is recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant, therefore, so far as, the offence under N.D.P.S. Act is concerned, is made out. However, learned A.G.A. has no rebuttal of the fact that present accused-applicant has no criminal antecedent of cases of like nature. Learned A.G.A. further submitted that instructions are received to him and whatever available on record to oppose the bail application, he is submitting before the Court.
8. Keeping into mind the valuable right of personal liberty and the fundamental principle not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence as, held in the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the bail-applicant to enlarge her on bail.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record, considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking into the complicity of the applicant-accused in the offence, the gravity of offence, severity of punishment without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
10. Let applicant (Sarvesh Patharkat), involved in Case Crime No.183 of 2021, under Sections 8/20 of N.D.P.S. Act, registered at Police Station Makhi, District Unnao be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant 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.
(ii) The applicant 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 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant 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 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant 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.
(v) The applicant is directed to move back a supplementary affidavit that further he will not involved himself in like offence of the N.D.P.S. Act in future otherwise the bail granted, shall stands vacated without order of the Court.
(Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 8.7.2021
Ravi/
