Nirmal Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 3372 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            Criminal Revision No. 529 of 2022
                           With
            Bail Application (IA) No.1 of 2022

Nirmal Singh                                    ........Revisionist

                              Versus

State of Uttarakhand                            ........Respondent


Present:-
            Mr. Harshpal Sekhon and Mr. Shailabh Pandey,
            Advocates for the revisionist.
            Mr. Lalit Miglani, A.G.A. with Ms. Sonika Khulbe, Brief
            Holder for the State.



Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

This criminal revision has though been admitted

upon the quantum of sentence alone on 01.10.2022, but

when the matter was heard on 15.10.2022, it is revealed that,

in fact, the Investigating Officer has not been examined in the

case.

2. It is the case in which the revisionist has been

convicted and sentenced by the judgment and order dated

27.03.2021, passed in Criminal Case No.1132 of 2015, State

of Uttarakhand vs. Nirmal Singh, under Sections 279 and

304A IPC, by the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sitarganj,

District Udham Singh Nagar (for short, "the case"). The

judgment and order dated 27.03.2021 has been upheld by

the judgment and order dated 28.05.2022, passed in

Criminal Appeal No.146 of 2021, Nirmal Singh vs. State of

Uttarakhand, by the court of Additional Sessions Judge,

Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar (for short, "the

appeal").

3. What would be the effect of non-examination of

Investigating Officer? Does it per se vitiates the conviction

and sentence? When asked, learned counsel for the

revisionist would submit that it could not per se vitiate the

conviction and sentence but, it has resulted into failure of

justice because the revisionist had lost the opportunity of fair

trial in terms of questioning the Investigating Officer with

regard to the action that has been taken by him.

4. In view of the fact which revealed now, this Court

is of the view that this matter requires deliberations on all

aspects. All the questions shall remain open. LCR has already

been received.

5. List this case for final hearing on 12.01.2023.

Bail Application (IA) No. 1 of 2022

6. Heard on bail application.

7. It is the case of the revisionist that he was on bail

during trial and he never misused the bail.

8. A short question would perhaps requires

determination that relates to non-examination of the

Investigating Officer in the case and its result. Particularly, as

to whether non-examination of the Investigating officer has

resulted into the failure of justice or by such not

examination, the revisionist has lost the opportunity of fair

defence.

9. Having considered, this Court is of the view that

the revisionist is entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail

application deserves to be allowed.

10. The bail application is allowed.

11. The execution of sentence appealed against shall

remain suspended during the pendency of this revision. Let

the revisionist be released on bail, during the pendency of

this revision, on his executing a personal bond and

furnishing two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to

the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 18.10.2022 Sanjay