Uttarakhand High Court
Hon'Ble Vivek Bharti Sharma vs Unknown on 10 June, 2025
Author: Vivek Bharti Sharma
Bench: Vivek Bharti Sharma
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
10.06.2025 CRJA No.61 of 2024
Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.
Mr. Digvijay Singh Bisht, learned Legal Aid
Counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate
General along with Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned A.G.A
and Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the
State.
3. Present criminal jail appeal is preferred against
the judgment and order dated 06.05.2024/07.05.2024
passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Khatima,
District Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial
No.106C/2016 (FIR No.27/2016), "State of
Uttarakhand Vs. Rajkumar" under Sections 395, 397,
412,120B, 342 of IPC, P.S. Nanakmatta, District -
Udham Singh Nagar and the appellant/convict has
challenged his conviction under Sections 395, 397, 342
and Section 120B of IPC.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant/convict would
submit that the judgment and order dated
06.05.2024/07.05.2024 has been passed by the Court
below without applying its legal acumen in a judicial
manner and the Court below has wrongly convicted and
sentenced the appellant/convict; that, the punishment
awarded is rigorous and harsh in comparison to the
charge levelled against the appellant/convict; that, the
prosecution has failed to produce any independent
witness of the alleged incident and only on the basis of
the statement of the complainant, who narrated the said
incident, the appellant/convict has been found guilty,
which is totally wrong and illegal, therefore, the same is
liable to be set aside.
5. Heard.
6. Admit the appeal.
7. Heard on the bail application.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant/convict would
submit that the appellant/convict has falsely been
implicated in the instant crime and has been made
scapegoat; that, the appellant/convict has no previous
criminal history; that, the prosecution witnesses
produced before the Court below are interested
witnesses; that, the appellant/convict was on bail during
pendency of the trial and he never misused the same;
that, two of the co-accused have already been enlarged
on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court; that, on
the ground of parity, the present appellant/convict may
also be released on bail as the appeal may take
considerable time for its conclusion due to heavy
pendency of cases.
9. Per contra, Counsel for the State opposed the bail
application, however, admitted that factual position is
not disputed and two of the co-accused have already
been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court.
10. Having considered the entirety of the facts and
without expressing any final opinion on the merits of
the case, the appellant/convict is admitted to bail on
parity.
11. Let the appellant/convict be released on bail,
during the pendency of present criminal jail appeal, on
furnishing bail bond with two sureties in the amount of
₹50,000/- and personal bond of the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
12. Bail application (IA/2/2025) stands disposed of
accordingly.
13. List this case in due course for final hearing.
(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.)
10.06.2025
SS
