Shivam Pathak @ Golu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Court No. - 13

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3562 of 2024 Appellant :- Shivam Pathak @ Golu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Appellant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶4

Order On Bail Application

¶5

Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of respondent -State and perused the record.

¶6

Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 415(2) Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 has been filed against judgment and order dated 28.10.2024 passed in Special Session Trial No.1257 of 2023 (State of U.P. versus Meena Pathak & Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No.109 of 2023, relating to Police Station Ram Sanehi Ghat, District Barabanki by which Trial Court has convicted and sentenced under Section 8/21(c) of NDPS Act for ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,00,000/-(One Lakh Only) and in default of payment of fine one year additional rigorous imprisonment.

¶7

As per contents of FIR, a police team on the basis of information received is said to have raided the house of one K. V. Pathak, co-accused who is father of appellant who tried to escape with a bag allegedly of illegal narcotics. It is stated that during the course of escape, the said person injured himself and was apprehended by the police team alongwith recovery of illegal smack from his possession. Allegedly the said Kinni Pathak confessed to his crime while also implicating the appellant as being co-conspirator. FIR also states that during search of appellant, 305 gms of smacks were recovered from the appellant.

¶8

It is submitted that appellant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him and that judgment of conviction has completely ignored the scope of sections 42A, 50 and 52A of the NDPS Act. It is submitted that the aspect of violation of Section 50 NDPS Act has been

¶9

considered by trial court only with respect to coaccused Kinni Pathak and not the appellant from whose personal possession, the alleged illegal narcotics is said to have been recovered. It is submitted that the trial court has also incorrectly placed reliance on judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Dinesh Kumar Singh versus State of U.P. & Ors. since the aforesaid judgment would be applicable only in case of apprehending a person during routine checking whereas in the present case, the police team allegedly had prior information. It is submitted that provisions of section 52A NDPS Act were also violated and have not been considered in the correct prospective by trial court. It is further submitted that appellant was enlarged on bail during the course of trial and did not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed bail application with the submission that judgment under challenge is cogent and reasonable and has considered all aspects particularly with regard to sections imputed has been considered. It is however admitted that appellant was enlarged on bail during the course of trial which has not been misused and his previous criminal history has been explained.

¶11

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that the aspect of violation of specific provisions of NDPS Act would require consideration by this Court at the time of hearing, particularly regarding violation of Sections 42A and 52A alongwith Section 50 NDPS Act. It is admitted that appellant's previous criminal history has been explained and he was under bail during the course of trial which has not been misused.

¶12

Let appellant/applicant Shivam Pathak @ Golu convicted in Special Sessions Trial No.1257 of 2023 be released on bail subject to the condition that they will furnish a personal bond with two sureties each of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶13

The half of fine imposed shall be deposited by the appellant within a period of six weeks from the

¶14

date of his actual release.

¶15

Learned trial court shall send one set of photostat copies of bail bonds to this Court immediately after accepting him. Original bail bonds be kept in the concerned court.

¶16

Order In Memo of Appeal

¶17

Lower Court Record has been received. List this case for hearing in the month of August, 2025.

¶18

Order Date : - 5.6.2025 Subodh/-

¶19

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

Shivam Pathak @ Golu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam Pathak @ Golu 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

Gagan Bountra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Brijbihari Lal Anil Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

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

Srawan Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Kamal Kishore and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Smt. Aamra @ Amra Siddiqui Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another