Disposed

Parasuram Khatik v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2020A482/4011/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by an informant to expedite a trial pending since 2001. The judge directed the trial court to conclude the final hearing within three weeks and decide the case within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Sessions Judge to expedite the trial, concluding final hearing within three weeks and deciding the case within two months.

Parasuram Khatik Vs State of U.P. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4011 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Parasuram Khatik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed certified copy of the entire ordersheet of the trial of sessions trial. The same is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking a direction to the Additional District Judge/F.T.C.I, Kushinagar to decide trial of S.T. No.456 of 2005, State vs. Ramayan alias Alkha arising out of case crime no.196 of 2001, under Section 396 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar within the stipulated period.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident of docoti occurred in the year 2001 and the case was committed to the court of session on 23.07.2005. Charges have been framed against the accused on 16.10.2008. It is stated that all the witnesses of fact and formal witnesses have been examined by the prosecution through several attempts have been made by the accused in order to linger the trial against them. However, the case was fixed for final hearing 03.06.2019 as stated in para-8 of the affidavit.

¶9

From perusal of the ordersheet, it appears that learned trial judge has been fixing dates after dates without any sufficient reason.

¶10

Be that as it may, I may further record that the applicant being the informant in the aforesaid session trial had filed an application for expeditious disposal of trial within stipulated period before this Court vide Application No.14326 of 2017 which was disposed of by the Court on 09.05.2017. It is stated that the said order has also been placed on record but the trial judge has not paid any heed to way and serious offence is pending since 2005.

¶11

Be that as it may, without entering into merit of the case I deem it fit to direct the Sessions Judge to expedite the trial and if the matter is fixed for final hearing, trial judge shall conclude the hearing within three weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order and decide the case within two months from today.

¶12

With the aforesaid direction, the present application is disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 3.2.2020

¶14

Asha

Parasuram Khatik v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parasuram Khatik v. State of U.P.

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

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Khare and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Iqbal Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Vs State of U.P.

Anant Karn Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sonu Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P.