Uttarakhand High Court
Sri Girish Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 22 April, 2024
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No. 225 of 2024
With
Bail Application No. 1 of 2024
Sri Girish Singh ......Revisionist
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ....Respondent
Present:
Mr. Jai Krishna Pandey, Advocate for the revisionist.
Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this revision is made to the
following:-
(i) Order dated 02.08.2023, passed in Criminal
Case No. 1296 of 2018, State of Uttarakhand
Vs. Girish Singh, by the court of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh, District
Pithoragarh ("the case"). By it, the revisionist
has been convicted under Section 60 (1) of
the United Provinces Excise Act, 1910 ("the
Act") and sentenced to undergo
imprisonment for a period of two years with a
fine of Rs.1,94,180/-. In default of payment
of fine, to undergo imprisonment for a period
of six months and;
(ii) Judgment and order dated 15.03.2024,
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2023,
Girish Singh Vs. State and another, by the
court of Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh ("the
appeal"). By it, the order passed in the case
was affirmed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. According to the prosecution case, on 14.07.2018
at 7:50 PM, when a search was conducted in the house of
the revisionist, 280 bottles of liquor were recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit
that the entire case is false. A search was made against the
provisions of the Act. He has referred to Sections 51, 52 and
53 of the Act to argue that the recovery memo does not
reveal as to when the Excise Department Officers received
information and when they proceed. It is argued that it has
not been recorded that the Excise Department Officers had
no time to obtain search warrant. Reference has been made
to Annexure 1, the recovery memo and the statements of
the witnesses.
5. Having heard, this Court is of the view that this
matter requires deliberation.
6. Admit.
7. List on 04.06.2024.
Heard on Bail Application No. 1 of 2024
8. The revisionist has been convicted and sentenced
under Section 60 of the Act on 02.08.2023, in Criminal
Case No. 1296 of 2018, State of Uttarakhand Vs. Girish
Singh, by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Pithoragarh. The revision has been admitted today.
9. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit
that the revisionist was on bail throughout during trial or in
appeal. What is argued is that the entire recovery is bad in
the eye of law. The raid has been conducted in defiance of
the provisions of the Act.
10. Having considered, this Court is of the view that
the revisionist is entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail
application deserves to be allowed.
11. The bail application is allowed.
12. Let the revisionist Girish Singh 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.)
03.04.2024
Jitendra
