Mahendra Singh v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY HOME UTTARAKHAND
CRLR/2/2015 · 2025-06-03
Rakesh Thapliyal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 751 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 751 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:4481 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
CRLR No.02 of 2015 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
1. None appears for the revisionist.
2. Mr. Pankaj Joshi, learned AGA for the State.
3. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent.
4. On perusal of the order-sheet, it reveals that since 2019, no one put appearance on behalf of the revisionist and now, as per office report dated 08.12.2023, the revisionist passed away on 20.01.2016. Even there is a report of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar dated 04.12.2023, wherein also a reference has been made that the revisionist died on 20.01.2016 and the death certificate is also enclosed.
5. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent apprises to this Court that the main accused have already been convicted by the trial court but, subsequently, the High Court acquitted them and the present respondent was a juvenile at the time of the incident.
6. This revision was preferred by the revisionist against the judgement by which the respondent-accused, who was juvenile, was acquitted and now taking into
consideration that the revisionist is no more, and, furthermore, the instant revision has been preferred against the acquittal, and apart from this, the main accused have been acquitted by the High Court, this Court is of the view that there is no useful purpose to continue the instant revision, and as such, the same is dismissed as abated.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
03.06.2025 R.Bisht
2025:UHC:4481