6 March vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1989 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

6 March vs State Of Uttarakhand on 16 March, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                        2026:UHC:1739
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
            Criminal Revision No. 157 of 2026
                         16 March, 2026



Durgesh Pant

                                                        --Revisionist
                               Versus
State Of Uttarakhand

                                                      --Respondent

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. C.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the revisionist.
Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned AGA for the State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

By means of present criminal revision, revisionist has put to challenge the charge framed against the revisionist-accused on 18.02.2026, passed by learned Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption) Act/2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital and all consequential proceedings in Special Trial No.04 of 2025, State vs. Durgesh Pant, under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1888.

2. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the charge does not disclose the demand of illegal gratification on the part of the revisionist from the complainant; he further submits that before reading over the charge to the revisionist-accused and before recording his plea of "not guilty", the learned trial court recorded that the revisionist shall be tried for the aforesaid charge, which itself is illegal.

2026:UHC:1739

3. So far as the argument regarding the fact that the charge does not disclose the demand of illegal gratification on the part of the revisionist-accused is concerned, the same is factually incorrect, as the charge clearly shows that there was a demand of illegal gratification in lieu of issuance of the work order and, pursuant to that demand, the revisionist-accused was caught red-handed by the vigilance team on 28.09.2024 at about 16:00 hours at the office of the Public Works Department situated in Tikonia, Haldwani, District Nainital. Thus, this Court feels that there is no infirmity in the charge and declines to interfere with the charge.

4. So far as the argument advanced by learned counsel for the revisionist is concerned that before reading over the charge to the revisionist-accused and before recording his plea of "not guilty", a direction has been issued to put the revisionist to trial in respect of the aforesaid charge, the same appears to be correct. Only for that limited purpose, the matter is remitted back to the learned trial court to read over the charge to the revisionist and then ask him as to whether he pleads guilty or not.

5. Accordingly, the present criminal revision is disposed of only to the extent as discussed hereinabove.

6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 16.03.2026 AK