Uttarakhand High Court
Ravi Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 8 August, 2025
Author: Rakesh Thapliyal
Bench: Rakesh Thapliyal
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Third Bail Application No. 35 of 2025
08 August, 2025
Ravi Kumar --Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand --Respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:
1. Ms. Divya Jain and Ms. Shweta Jain, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned AAG along with Mr. Siddhartha Bisht,
learned AGA for the State.
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. (Oral)
Today, learned counsel for the applicant place
before this Court a chart pertaining to the progress and
status of the trial, the copy of which, in advance was
supplied to Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned AAG for the State. On
perusal of the progress and status of the trial, it reveals
that after framing of charges as many as 55 dates were
fixed, out of which on 35 dates, the prosecution sought
adjournment.
2. The applicant is facing trial for the offence punishable
under Section 302 IPC and is languishing in jail since
14.11.2021 i.e. almost for three years and nine months,
there are in total 28 prosecution witnesses and within nine
period of three years, only four prosecution witnesses have
been examined. It appears from this chart that this is
completely lapse on the part of the prosecution that on 35
dates, the prosecution sought adjournment.
3. On the previous date, the Director Prosecution was
asked to join and in compliance thereof the District
Magistrate as well the Director Prosecution join the
proceeding and apprise to this Court that the progress of
trials in respect of the major offences are being monitored
by Additional LR.
4. On this, the Additional LR was also asked to join the
proceeding on 05.08.2025 and in compliance thereof, the
1
Additional LR join the proceeding through V.C. and apprise
to this Court the monitoring of the trial is being supervised
by a Committee of the concerned District Judge, the DM
and the DGC.
5. Ms. Divya Jain refers Section 25-A of Cr.P.C, which is
being reproduced herein as under:-
“Directorate of Prosecution-(1) The State Government
may establish a Directorate of Prosecution consisting of
a Director of Prosecution and as many Deputy Directors
of Prosecution as it thinks fit.
(2) A person shall be eligible to be appointed as a
Director of Prosecution or a Deputy Director of
Prosecution, only if he has been in practice as an
advocate for not less than ten years and such
appointment shall be made with the concurrence of the
Chief Justice of the High Court.
(3) The Head of the Directorate of Prosecution shall be
the Director of Prosecution, who shall function under
the administrative control of the Head of the Home
Department in the State.
(4) Every Deputy Director of Prosecution shall be
subordinate to the Director of Prosecution.
(5) Every Public Prosecutor, Additional Public
Prosecutor and Special Public Prosecutor appointed by
the State Government under sub-section (1), or as the
case may be, sub-section (8), of section 24 to conduct
cases in the High Court shall be subordinate to the
Director of Prosecution.
(6) Every Public Prosecutor, Additional Public Prosecutor
and Special Public Prosecutor appointed by the State
Government under sub-section (3), or as the case may
be, sub-section (8), of section 24 to conduct cases in
District Courts and every Assistant Public Prosecutor
appointed under sub-section (1) of section 25 shall be
subordinate to the Deputy Director of Prosecution.
(7) The powers and functions of the Director of
Prosecution and the Deputy Directors of Prosecution
and the areas for which each of the Deputy Directors of
Prosecution have been appointed shall be such as the2
State Government may, by notification, specify.
(8) The provisions of this section shall not apply to the
Advocate General for the State while performing the
functions of a Public Prosecutor.”
6. In response to this, Mr. Manish Pandey, the
Additional LR refers Section 20 of BNSS, 2023, which is
being reproduced herein as under:-
“20. Directorate of Prosecution.-(1) The State
Government may establish,-
(a) a Directorate of Prosecution in the State consisting of
a Director of Prosecution and as many Deputy Directors
of Prosecution as it thinks fit; and
(b) a District Directorate of Prosecution in every district
consisting of as many Deputy Directors and Assistant
Directors of Prosecution, as it thinks fit.
(2) A person shall be eligible to be appointed.-
(a) as a Director of Prosecution or a Deputy Director of
Prosecution, if he has been in practice as an advocate
for not less than fifteen years or is or has been a
Sessions Judge;
(b) as an Assistant Director of Prosecution, if he has
been in practice as an advocate for not less than seven
years or has been a Magistrate of the first class.
(3) The Directorate of Prosecution shall be headed
by the Director of Prosecution, who shall function
under the administrative control of the Home
Department in the State.
(4) Every Deputy Director of Prosecution or Assistant
Director of Prosecution Prosecution shall be subordinate
to the Deputy Director of Prosecution.
(5) Every Public Prosecutor, Additional Public Prosecutor
and Special Public Prosecutor appointed by the State
Government under sub-section (1) or sub-section (8) of
Section 18 to conduct cases in the High Court shall be
subordinate to the Director of Prosecution.
3
(6) Every Public Prosecutor, Additional Public Prosecutor
and Special Public Prosecutor appointed by the State
Government under sub-section (3) or sub-section (8) of
Section 18 to conduct cases in District Courts and every
Assistant Public Prosecutor appointed under sub-
section (1) of Section 19 shall be subordinate to the
Deputy Director of Prosecution or the Assistant Director
of Prosecution.
(7) The powers and functions of the Director of
Prosecution shall be to monitor cases in which offences
are punishable for ten years or more, or with life
imprisonment, or with death; to expedite the
proceedings and to give opinion on filing of appeals.
(8) The powers and functions of the Deputy Director of
Prosecution shall be to examine and scrutinise police
report and monitor the cases in which offences are
punishable for seven years or more, but less than ten
years, for ensuring their expeditious disposal.
(9) The functions of the Assistant Director of
Prosecution shall be to monitor cases in which offences
are punishable for less than seven years.
10) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
sections (7), (8) and (9), the Director, Deputy Director or
Assistant Director of Prosecution shall have the power
to deal with and be responsible for all proceedings
under this Sanhita.
(11) The other powers and functions of the Director of
Prosecution, Deputy Directors of Prosecution and
Assistant Directors of Prosecution and the areas for
which each of the Deputy Directors of Prosecution or
Assistant Directors of Prosecution have been appointed
shall be such as the State Government may, by
notification, specify.
(12) The provisions of this section shall not apply to the
Advocate General for the State while performing the
functions of a Public Prosecutor.
4
Section 20(7) of BNSS, 2023 clearly provides that the
powers and functions of the Director of Prosecution shall be
to monitor cases in which offences are punishable for ten
years or more, or with life imprisonment, or with death.
7. The BNSS, 2023 came into force with effect from
01.07.2024.
8. The Director Prosecution, Mr. P.V.K. Prasad apprise to
this Court that Section 25-A of Cr.P.C was never been
implemented in the State of Uttarakhand.
9. He also apprise to this Court that even Section 20 of
the BNSS, 2023 has also not been implemented so far and
it’s implementation is still in progress.
10. It is very strange that Section 25-A of the Cr.P.C was
never been implemented though it was instituted by Act
No.25 of 2005 with effect from 23.06.2006. Further the
BNSS, 2023 came into force with effect from 01.07.2024
still Section 20 has not been implemented so far.
11. The present applicant is in a judicial custody since
last three years and nine months and out of 28 prosecution
witnesses, up till date, only 4 witnesses have been
examined. This is really very shocking and surprising since
the delay is apparently on the part of the prosecution. It
appears that in expediting the trial, there is no monitoring
as such.
12. The Director Prosecution also apprise to this Court
that there are as many as 90,000 trials, which are pending
in the entire State of Uttarakhand, there are only 123
prosecution officers including PO, APO, SPO and Joint
Director. This is really very surprising.
13. Let the Law Secretary including ALR-Manish Pandey,
the DM and the Director Prosecution may sit together and
discuss the issue and share with the Secretary Home and
apprise to this Court on Tuesday i.e. on 12.08.2025.
14. Ms. Divya Jain, also place before this Court one of
the recent judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Kattavellai @ Devakar versus State of Tamilnadu, Criminal
Appeal No.1672 of 2019, decided on 15.07.2025,
5
particularly she refers para No. 45 onwawrds.
15. Let Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned AAG may also go
through with that judgment.
16. List this matter on 12.08.2025.
. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.)
08.08.2025
R.Bisht
6