The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail cancellation application and observed that the Advocate, has, prima facie, conducted himself against the Bar Council Rules, professional ethics, contemptuous manner and he has played fraud with the Court and also interfered with the course of justice by misleading the Court as he concealed the material fact regarding rejection of the first bail application by the Bench.
The application under Section 439(2) CrPC has been filed seeking cancellation of the order dated 22.3.2022 enlarging the accused-applicant on bail passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application in Case under Sections 379, 411, 412, 413, 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 484 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.
The Court noted Parmanand Gupta, counsel for the accused-respondent, deliberately styled the Criminal Misc Bail Application as the first bail application and, therefore, it got listed before the Court which was dealing with the subject matter. If the correct and true facts would have been mentioned that it was the second bail application inasmuch as the first bail application got rejected by the Court order dated 19.2.2021, in which the accused-applicant has been ordered to be enlarged on bail, would have been listed before the Bench and the alleged first bail application would get rejected by the Bench.
Having noticed this fact that Parmanand Gupta, counsel for the accused-respondent had played tricks to obtain a favourable order by styling the second bail application as the first bail application, the State has filed the application for cancellation of bail granted to the accused-respondent.
“Considering the fact that the order dated 22.3.2022 was obtained on misrepresentation/false facts that this was the first bail application, the order dated 22.3.2022 passed in Criminal Misc Bail Application enlarging the accused-respondent, Mohd Rizwan @ Raziwan in the case, is hereby cancelled. He shall be taken into custody forthwith, if already not arrested,” the Court ordered.
“In view of the facts narrated above, Parmanand Gupta, Advocate, has, prima facie, conducted himself against the Bar Council Rules, professional ethics, contemptuous manner and he has played fraud with the Court and also interfered with the course of justice by misleading the Court as he concealed the material fact regarding rejection of the first bail application by the Bench,” the Court observed.
The Court also noted that this is not the solitary case where Parmanand Gupta, Advocate, had adopted the said course of action of concealing and misleading the Court.
In view thereof, the Court opined that Parmanand Gupta, Advocate, has, prima facie, committed the Contempt of the Court.
“Let suo motu criminal contempt proceedings be drawn against Parmanand Gupta, Advocate. Registry to take follow up action in the matter. Let all these orders form part of the contempt proceedings to be drawn against Parmanand Gupta, Advocate. With the above noted terms, the bail cancellation application stands allowed,” the Court ordered.