VED PRAKASH SAINI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) By means of the present criminal revision, the revisionist has put to challenge the judgment and order dtd. 17/4/2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Didihat, District Pithoragarh, in Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2023 State Vs. Praveen Singh Kanyal, whereby, the judgment and order dtd. 31/5/2022 passed by the learned Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Didihat, District Pithoragarh in Case No.75 of 2019 State of Uttarakhand Vs. Praveen Singh Kanyal, was affirmed and the accused-respondent No.2 was acquitted of the charges under Ss. 323, 353, 332 and 506 IPC.

(3.) It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionist that there is a cross case filed by the accused-respondent No.2, in which, a charge-sheet had also been filed. The learned Courts below completely failed to consider the relevant and connected nature of both cases, which had direct bearing upon each other. The revisionist-complainant being a public servant, was performing his official duties, when the alleged incident occurred. This important aspect has been overlooked by the learned Courts below, which would otherwise merit higher evidentiary value under law.