Single judge disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking expediting orders. The court noted the case was pending only five months since cognizance; no specific order for expediting was passed but trial was expected immediately.
No order for expediting was passed given recent cognizance; directed below to proceed expeditiously.
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. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 199 of 2020
Applicant :- Priyanka Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Other Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Shantam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Vijay Shantam, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to direct the Court below to expedite the trial of Criminal Case No. 6142 of 2019 (State vs. Sudhir Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 639 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C., P.S. Banna Devi, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, within a stipulated period.
It transpires that cognizance has been taken on the charge-sheet in August, 2019 by the concerned Magistrate, however, till date the case has not been committed to the court of Sessions. It has been argued that the applicant is the first informant in the aforesaid case and the accused have not appeared till date.
Be that as it may, the trial court after ensuring the presence of the accused and complying with the provisions of Section 207 Cr.P.C. shall commit the case to the court of Sessions as expeditiously as possible. Since the cognizance has recently been taken about five months back, I do not deem it fit to pass any order for expediting and concluding the trial within a stipulated period. However, it is expected from the courts below to proceed with the trial as expeditiously as possible.
With the aforesaid observations, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 7.1.2020 Vikas
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an order expediting a pending criminal trial alleging inordinate delay was appropriate under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
What direction could be given to the trial court regarding the though still pending to be committed to Sessions
Whether inception of trial was premature after only five months from cognizance
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Priyanka Saxena
State Of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
