IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
Gaurav Arjun Patil - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Bail Application No. 2893 of 2024
Decided on : 15-04-2025
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Official Secrets Act, 1923 - Sections 3(1)(a)(c), 4, 5(1)(a)(b)(d), and 9 - Application for bail - Applicant charged with sharing sensitive information with foreign agents - Court considers the applicant's young age, lack of criminal antecedents, and the nature of the evidence presented - The applicant was honey-trapped and acted without bad intention - Bail granted with conditions. (Paras 1, 6, 12, 20, 27)
(B) Bail considerations - The court must weigh the gravity of the offence, nature of evidence, and the character of the accused - Young offenders should be given opportunities for reform rather than punishment. (Paras 10, 26)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, a 23-year-old apprentice, was arrested for allegedly sharing sensitive naval information with individuals posing as friends on social media, who were later identified as foreign agents. He has been in custody for over 16 months. (Paras 2, 5, 20)
Findings of Court:
The applicant cooperated with the investigation, and the evidence suggests he was manipulated into sharing information. The court emphasized the need for reform for young offenders. (Paras 12, 20, 27)
Issues: Whether the applicant's actions constituted a serious threat to national security and if he should be granted bail considering his age and circumstances. (Paras 10, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the applicant's young age and lack of prior criminal history warranted consideration for bail, emphasizing the importance of rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders. (Paras 20, 27)
Result: Bail granted with specific conditions. (Para 30)
JUDGEMENT :
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
1. Heard Mr. Rathod, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms. Deshmukh, learned SPP for Respondent – State and Mr. Dalal, learned Amicus Curiae appointed by the Court.
2. Present Application is filed by Applicant – Gaurav Arjun Patil under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking regular bail in connection with First Information Report (for short “FIR”) No.08 of 2023 registered with Kalachowki Police Station for offences under Sections 3(1)(a)(c), 4 , 5(1)(a)(b)(d) and 9 of the Official Secrets Act , 1923 (for short “the said Act”) readwith Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”). Investigation in the matter is completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the Sessions Court, Thane which has culminated into Special Case (ATS) No.142 of 2024. There are total 4 Accused persons arraigned in the crime. Applicant before me is arraigned as Accused No.1 and is incarcerated since 13.12.2023. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 are shown as absconding accused. Accused No.4 is a 25 year old woman hailing from Kaliyaganj, West Bengal, a mobile smart card seller and crypto currency trader who transferred Rs.2,000/- online to the Applicant at the behest of Accused No.3. Accused No.4 after being arrested initially is however dropped from the charge-sheet for want of evidence under Section 169 of Cr.P.C.
3. By order dated 13.03.2025 this Court appointed Mr. Dormaan J. Dalal, Advocate practicing at the bar as Amicus Curiae to aid and assist the Court in the present matter.
4. Applicant before me is a 23 year old young offender on the threshold of his life and career with an excellent academic record but having found himself on the wrong-side of the law. Educational qualification of Applicant is that he completed his Certificate Course in Mechanic Diesel from Industrial Training Institute (“ITI”), Jalgaon ITI recognised by National Council for Vocational Training (“NCVT”). Applicant cleared the All India Trade Test for Apprentices in December 2023 with a score of 72.75% pursuant to completion of his apprenticeship of one year in Naval Dockyard, Mumbai from 21.11.2022 to 20.11.2023. During his apprenticeship he received Rs.7,000/- per month as stipend and he was boarded at the Naval Dockyard Hostel premises in the restricted Naval Dockyard area. Applicant hails from Taluka Pachora District Jalgaon.
5. According to prosecution, period during which alleged offence was committed is from May 2023 to October 2023. Briefly stated, on 13.10.2023 prosecution received intelligence input information from ATS, Thane Unit about the alleged offence. Investigation was carried out. FIR was lodged on 12.12.2023 which is appended at page No.14 of the Application. Applicant was arrested on 13.12.2023 and is in incarceration since then for the past almost 1 year and 4 months. Previous Bail Application of Applicant was rejected by the Special Court 24.05.2024 and hence Applicant is before this Court seeking bail.
6. Mr. Rathod, learned Advocate appearing for the Applicant would submit that it is the prosecution case that during the period between April – May 2023 to October 2023, Applicant got acquainted with Accused No.2 – Arati Sharma and Accused No.3 – Payal Angel, the absconding accused persons on social media platforms Whatsapp and Facebook separately and started chatting with them. He would submit that Accused Nos.2 and 3 represented to Applicant that they both were employed in a shipping company and developed acquaintance and friendship with him and during the course of their regular and repeatedly consistent chats on Whatsapp and Facebook induced and lured the Applicant to provide information in respect of ships which were docked in the Naval Dockyard area for repairs, location of boats and ships, engine drawings, information about submarines docked in the Naval Dockyard for repairs which information was confidential and sensitive in nature. He would submit that according to prosecut
The court emphasized the need for rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, considering their age and circumstances in bail decisions.
The court emphasized the need for a reformative approach in dealing with young offenders, considering their potential for rehabilitation over punitive measures.
The court emphasized rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, allowing bail to promote education and prevent recidivism.
The court emphasized rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, allowing bail based on the applicant's age, educational background, and circumstances of the incident.
The court emphasized rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, allowing bail based on the Applicant's age and circumstances surrounding the incident.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; the court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the need for a balanced approach in serious offences against minors.
The court emphasized a reformative approach for young offenders, prioritizing rehabilitation over punitive measures, especially in cases involving serious allegations against minors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.