Disposed

Smt. Vidhya Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2021A482/6512/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the wife of the informant in a 14-year-old pending Sessions Trial. The Court directed the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaunpur, to decide the trial with all expedition within one year without unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Additional Sessions Judge, Faast Track Court-1, Jaunpur to decide Sessions Trial No. 253 of 2006 with all expedition within one year.

Smt. Vidhya Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6512 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Vidhya Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad Kumar Srivastava,Phool Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Sharad Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for a direction to Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-1, Jaunpur to decide Sessions Trial No. 253 of 2006 (State Vs. Sanjay Kumar), under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Sarai Khawaza, District Jaunpur, arising out of Case Crime No. 84 of 2004, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-1, Jaunpur within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶7

At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is the wife of informant Sabhapati who has died on account of Pandemic Covid-19. Applicant is an aggrieved person, therefore, applicant has locus to maintain this application.

¶8

It is next contended that above mentioned trial has been pending for the last 14 years. Above mentioned case was registered in the year 2006. A period of about 14 years has rolled by, but above mentioned Sessions Trial has not yet been decided.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant further submits that in case, a direction is issued to Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-1, Jaunpur to expedite and conclude above mentioned Sessions Trial interest of justice shall be served.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed this application. However, he could not dispute the submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of material on record, this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping this application pending.

¶12

Accordingly, this application is disposed of finally with a direction to Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-1, Jaunpur, to decide above mentioned Sessions Trial with all expedition, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified/computer generated copy of this order before him, which shall be filed by applicant before Court below by means of a notary affidavit.

¶13

Order Date :- 19.7.2021 HSM

Smt. Vidhya Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vidhya Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Mohd. Shakir @ Shakir Ali and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Indira Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 2 Others

Man Singh @ Man Singh Baghel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Johari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rijwan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish (Minor) Vs State of Up and Another