Uttarakhand High Court
CRLA/61/2025 on 13 February, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
Bail Application No. 1 of 2025
In
CRLA No. 61 of 2025
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the
appellant/ applicant.
2. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Deputy Advocate
General for the State.
3. This instant appeal has been preferred by the
appellant (convict) against the judgment and order
dated 29.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge,
Prevention of Corruption Act, Haldwani, Nainital in
Special Sessions Trial No. 08 of 2018 whereby appellant
has been convicted and sentenced to undergo 5 years
rigorous imprisonment with the fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-
for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the
Prevention of Corruption Act IPC. He has also been
convicted and sentenced to undergo 5 years rigorous
imprisonment with the fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the
offence punishable under Section 13 (1) (d) read with
Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
4. As per office report, appeal is within time.
5. Admit the appeal.
6. Summon the trial court record.
7. After receiving the trial court record, registry is
directed to prepare the paper book and supply the
same to the learned counsel for the parties, as per
Rules.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties on bail
application.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant was trapped by the vigilance team and Rs.
8500 was shown to be recovered from the appellant but
at the time of remand, currency of Rs. 6500/- was
shown to be recovered from the appellant and
therefore, such a discrepancy itself vitiates entire trial,
however, this aspect has not been dealt with properly
by the trial court while convicting the appellant, as
such, conviction is bad in law.
10. Ms. Pushpa Bhatt, learned Deputy Advocate
General for the State, submits that this aspect has been
dealt by the trial court in paragraph 262 of the
judgment.
11. On perusal of the observations, as recorded by
the trial court, it appears that the trial court has not
examined this aspect that if there is fault on the part of
the investigating agency, whether it will vitiate the
trial. It appears that this aspect goes to the root of the
matter.
12. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits
that appellant was on bail during trial and he never
misused the same and have no previous criminal
history.
13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this
Court is of the view that since appellant was on bail
during trial and he never misused the same, therefore,
he deserves for bail. Accordingly, without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, bail application is
allowed.
14. Let appellant - Amit Giri be released on bail
during the pendency of the instant criminal appeal, on
furnishing his personal bond and two sureties, each of
the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court
concerned.
15. Sentence and realization of the fine shall also
remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal.
16. List this appeal in due course.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
13.02.2025
SKS
