The High Court of Uttarakhand declined to grant Special Leave to Appeal against an acquittal in Special Session Trial No. 18 of 2014. Consequently, the pending Government Appeal was declared not maintainable as the supreme appellate remedy failed.
Special Leave to Appeal dismissed; Government Appeal held not maintainable.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J. AND SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE, J.
03RD MARCH, 2022
SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL No. 26 OF 2022 WITH
GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. 06 OF 2022
Between:
State of Uttarakhand.
…Appellant
and
Deepu @ Bhupendra Singh Rana and another.
…Respondents
Counsel for the appellant. : Mr. J.S. Virk, the learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Rakesh Joshi, the learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. Counsel for the respondents. : None.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made the following
JUDGMENT : ( per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)
Special Leave to Appeal No. 26 of 2022 :-
This is an application for grant of leave to
appeal against the order of acquittal rendered by the learned Special Sessions Judge (SC/ST), Almora in Special Session Trial No. 18 of 2014 dated 29.11.2021.
circumstances in the present case. We also do not find any compelling and substantial reasons, prima facie , to grant Special Leave to Appeal. In this case we take note of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa in CRLLP No. 103 of 2015, State of Orissa v. Urmila Nayak , in which one of us (S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.) has rendered the judgment, wherein it has been laid down as follows :-
No doubt the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ghurey Lal Vs. State of U.P.; (2008) 10 SCC 450 case relates to final judgment of the appeal against acquittal, but we are of the opinion that those Considerations also should weigh in the mind of the Court while granting the leave to file appeal against acquittal. However, while considering the desirability or otherwise of granting leave to appeal against acquittal, the appellate Court, at the first
2
instance, is required to, prima facie, be satisfied about the existence of conditions that are required for overturning a judgment of acquittal to one of conviction While deciding a matter regarding grant of leave to appeal against acquittal, the Court must be satisfied, prima facie, that at the final hearing of the appeal ‘very substantial and compelling reasons’ can be shown, on the basis of which it will be most reasonable to overturn a judgment of acquittal. Only then the appellate court should grant the leave to appeal against acquittal.
3
Government Appeal No. 06 OF 2022
dated 29.11.2021.
________________ S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
R.C. KHULBE, J.
Dt: 03rd March, 2022 Rahul
4
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ghurey Lal vs. State of U.P.Referred¶21
(2008) 10 SCC 450, Ghurey Lal Vs. State of U.P. · Who else cites this
State of Orissa v. Urmila NayakReferred¶20
CRLLP No. 103 of 2015, State of Orissa v. Urmila Nayak
State of Uttarakhand
Deepu @ Bhupendra Singh Rana
S.K. Mishra
R.C. Khulbe
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
