TINKU @ VINOD S/O BABU LAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Tinku @ Vinod S/O Babu Lal
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State, it appears that the Sessions Trial No.25 of 2011, State Vs. Shivraj and others, is being proceeded in the court of Second Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun.
(2.) Vide the impugned order, learned Judge has rejected the application moved by the petitioner whereby he sought opportunity to cross-examine PW2 Suresh.
(3.) This Court does not want to burden the instant order by reproducing the entire facts, which have been elaborately explained by learned Judge in the order-sheet of the trial dated 1.8.2012. This order is quite explicit and a speaking one, manifesting the mischievous conduct of the accused and his counsel, just to hamper and stunt the course of justice, much less the speedy justice. It appears that the petitioner has surpassed all the canons of a fair judicial trial, by not permitting the trial court to proceed further with the trial. Thus, such accused like the petitioner does not deserve any sympathy of this Court otherwise the system of dispensation of justice in the lower court will certain crumble down. Rather it would be travesty of justice if such people find any encouragement from the end of this Court.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.