Disposed

Shalu Rathor v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC28 Sept 2018A482/34745/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court addressed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking expedited disposal of a criminal charge sheet due to apprehended threats by accused persons. The Court directed the lower court to conclude the trial within six months, without granting adjournments. This order ensures speedy trial for the complainant.

What did the court decide?

Directed the court below to decide the criminal case within six months from the date of this order with no adjournments.

Shalu Rathor Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34745 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shalu Rathor Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicantn & learned AGA and perused the material on record.

¶6

The applicant/complainant through the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with the prayer that learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (IIIrd) Agra may be directed to decide the Criminal Case No. 1560 of 2017 (State versus Suraj and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 659 of 2017 under sections 147/354(b)/323/504 IPC Police Station Tajganj District Agra within a stipulated period.

¶7

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged way back on 5.7.2017 against the accused respondents. The investigating officer swung into action and after collecting credible and clinching materials submitted charge sheet against them on 25.7.2017. The court below took cognizance of the matter and the charges were also framed against them vide order dated 21.9.2017. The accused respondents are on bail and are extending constant threats to ruin the life and property of the complainant and her family members. The applicant has every apprehension that in case the matter is not expedited for early disposal, the accused persons will further indulge in similar activities effecting her life and property will be extensively damaged. So far only two prosecution witnesses have been examined as the accused respondents are applying their all gadgets to dilate the proceedings so as to frustrate the proceedings.

¶8

Learned AGA did not oppose the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant rather buttressed the same stating that the speedy trial is the essence of justice.The court has to perform the balancing act upon taking into consideration all the attending circumstances,

¶9

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA, it is provided that the court below will proceed with the matter following the principle of de die in diem and will reach to its logical conclusion within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. It is however, clarified that the court below will not grant adjournment to any of the parties. In case adjournment is sought by any of the party, the court below is at liberty to impose heavy cost.

¶10

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of as above.

¶11

Order Date :- 28.9.2018 Naim

Shalu Rathor v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shalu Rathor v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nazar Mohammad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Jyotsana Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Kishor Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babban @ Babloo and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Verma Vs State of U.P.

Dev Kumar @ Pappu Pandey and 3 others Vs State of U.P. and another