In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court directed the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jaunpur to decide the pending maintenance case filed in 2015 within six months, forbidding unnecessary adjournments.
Direction to decide the Section 125 Cr.P.C. case within six months from the date of order.
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.
Court No. - 49
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3100 of 2018
Petitioner :- Pratima Bharti Respondent :- Suresh Kumar Counsel for Applicant: Birendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party: G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State as also perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking direction to the court below to decide the Case No. 615 of 2015 (Pratima Bharti Vs. Suresh Kumar) under Section 125 Cr.P.C., pending before the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Jaunpur, within stipulated period.
Considering the fact that the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has remained pending since 08.07.2015 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is finally disposed of with a direction to the court below to decide the aforesaid case in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary or long adjournments to either of the parties as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. The applicant may also file an application claiming interim maintenance allowance.
If for any reason, the court below is unable to decide the aforesaid case within the time granted, it shall necessarily consider and decide the application for grant of interim maintenance, if any, within the same time period.
Order Date :- 2.5.2018 Lbm/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Section 125 Cr.P.C. case pending since 2015 should be directed to be decided within a stipulated period.
Whether the High Court should issue directions to prevent unnecessary adjournments in the pending maintenance case.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Pratima Bharti
Suresh Kumar
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
