State Of Uttarakhand vs Rishipal
2025 Latest Caselaw 2162 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

State Of Uttarakhand vs Rishipal on 21 February, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
       Special Leave to Appeal No. 32 of 2025

State of Uttarakhand                               ......Appellant

                              Versus


Rishipal                                        ....Respondent



Present:
            Mr. Siddharth Bisht, A.G.A. for the State/appellant.

                                       With
           Government Appeal No. 12 of 2025

State of Uttarakhand                               ......Appellant

                              Versus


Rishipal                                        ....Respondent



Present:
            Mr. Siddharth Bisht, A.G.A. for the State/appellant.



Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.(Oral)

The Delay Condonation Application No. 1 of 2025 is

allowed. Delay in preferring the appeal is condoned.

2. The respondent has been acquitted for the charge

under Section 506 IPC and Section 7/8 and 9 (m)/10 of the

Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on

31.07.2024 in Sessions Trial No. 97 of 2017, "A" Vs.

Rishipal, by the court of Additional Sessions Judge/FTSC,

District Haridwar ("the case").

3. Now, State seeks leave to appeal against the

judgment and order passed in the case.

4. Heard learned counsel for the State/appellant

and perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the State/appellant would

submit that the victim has supported the prosecution case

in her examination-in-chief recorded under Section 244 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code") and her

statement has been supported by her father and mother.

6. The case was based on an application filed under

Section 156 (3) of the Code by the father of the victim.

According to it, on 06.01.2017 at 11:30 in the morning,

when the victim visited the shop of the respondent, he took

her inside the shop and sexually assaulted her. This

application under Section 156 (3) of the Code was treated as

a complaint. After inquiry under Sections 200 and 202 of the

Code, the respondent was summoned. At the stage of

examination under Section 244 of the Code, three witnesses,

namely, PW1 the father of the victim, PW2 the mother of the

victim and PW3 the victim were examined. But thereafter,

they did not appear for cross examination despite service of

summons. After considering the matter, by the impugned

judgment and order, the respondent has been acquitted.

7. This Court is unable to apprehend as to what is

the basis for the State to file leave to appeal in this matter.

Three witnesses were examined at the stage of Section 244 of

the Code, It is their examination-in-chief. But, they did not

appear for cross examination. Without cross examination of

any witness, such statement cannot be read as evidence that

is what has been held in the impugned judgment and order.

There is, in fact, no evidence in the case. Therefore, there is

no reason to grant leave to the State to prefer an appeal.

8. Accordingly, Special leave to appeal is dismissed.

Consequently, Government Appeal is also dismissed.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 21.02.2025 Jitendra