Tahal Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 2108 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Tahal Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 12 September, 2024

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

      Criminal Misc. Application No. 437 of 2024
Tahal Singh                                           ..........Petitioner

                                    Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and others                     ........ Respondents

Present :   Mr. Basant Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Harshpal Sekhon,
            Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. Pankaj Joshi, AGA with Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Brief Holder for
            the State/respondent no.1.



                              JUDGMENT

Per : Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

By means of the instant petition, the petitioner

seeks directions for the Sessions Trial No. 106 of 2023,

State of Uttarakhand vs. Gurmej Singh and others,

pending in the court of First Additional Sessions Judge,

Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar ("the case")

claiming direction that the case to be decided

expeditiously.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. The case is based on FIR No.83 of 2023, dated

05.04.2023, under Section 304-B IPC, Police Station

Kunda, District Udham Singh Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that the witnesses are being threatened.

Therefore, the trial would be expedited. He would submit

that an application for transfer of the trial has also been

filed. Order-sheet of the case has also been filed. Learned

counsel would submit that examination-in-chief of the

informant has already been recorded. In fact, the order-

sheet of the case reveals that on 05.07.2024, the

statement of PW1 was partially recorded and on the

application of the prosecution, date was adjourned for

19.07.2024. On 19.07.2024, the court has directed that a

Pendrive be provided to the accused, so that they may

have a fair defence.

5. The Court wanted to know from the learned

counsel for the petitioner, as to whether any application

under Witness Protection Scheme has been given by the

petitioner with regard to the threat that has allegedly

been extended to him? The answer is in negative. If any

threat is being extended to the witnesses, recourse to the

Witness Protection Scheme may also be taken.

6. In so far as expeditious disposal is concerned,

each case has to be decided as expeditiously as possible.

The cases are listed as per priority, year of pendency and

on the many other factors. This Court has no doubt that

the court below shall decide this case in accordance to

the priority of cases, maintained in that court, as

expeditiously as possible.

7. With the above observation, the petition stands

disposed of.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 12.09.2024 Sanjay