"State vs Unknown
2022 Latest Caselaw 1771 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                 AT NAINITAL
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA


                      14TH JUNE, 2022

             CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 108 of 2022


Between:

Vijendra Negi.                                   ...Appellant

and

State of Uttarakhand.                          ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant    : Mr. D.S. Mehta.

Counsel for the State        : Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj,
                               learned Deputy Advocate
                               General for the State.

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

The present Criminal Appeal has been filed by

the appellant-Govind Prasad against the judgment dated

29.03.2022/31.03.2022, passed by the Special Judge

(Anti Corruption Act)/ Ist Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Nainital, in Special Sessions Trial No.03 of 2015,

"State vs. Constable Govind Prasad and four Others",

whereby, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced

to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year

for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC; he

has been convicted and sentenced to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence

punishable under Section 342 of IPC, and, he has been

further convicted and sentenced to undergo simple

imprisonment for a period of three years along with a fine

of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 15 read with

Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act,

1988. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

2. Heard Mr. D.S. Mehta, the learned counsel for

the appellant and Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj, the

learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

3. Heard on the Bail Application No.1 of 2022.

4. Mr. D.S. Mehta, the learned counsel for the

appellant, submitted that the appellant has been falsely

implicated; there are substantial doubt about the

conviction; the appellant was on bail during the trial and

the conditions of bail were neither misused nor violated by

the appellant, and, the appellant is on interim bail.

5. Mr. Subhash Tyagi Bhardwaj, the learned

Deputy Advocate General for the State, opposed the bail

application. However, he fairly submitted that the

appellant was on bail during the trial and the conditions of

bail were neither misused nor violated by the appellant.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the appellant

Vijendra Negi, provided he submits a personal bond and

two reliable sureties of the same amount to the

satisfaction of the court concerned.

__________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 14th June, 2022 Neha