Court directed the appellate authority to decide the pending appeal within three weeks. Petitioner's application for interim stay was rejected as the previous authority had already applied its mind to reject the stay petition. No merit was examined.
Directed appellate authority to decide appeal within three weeks; no interim relief granted on stay.
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. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 35 of 2021
Petitioner :- Danish Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Belal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Sri Mohammad Belal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.K.Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.
Against the impugned externment order dated 23.10.2020, passed by the District Magistrate, the petitioner had preferred an appeal along with application for stay before the Commissioner. Vide impugned order dated 23.12.2020, the stay application of the petitioner has been rejected. Counsel for the petitioner submits that purpose of filing this petition would be served if direction is issued to the appellate authority for deciding the appeal itself within some time frame and till then some interim protection be granted to the petitioner.
State counsel has no objection if any such direction is issued to the appellate authority for deciding the appeal at an early date. He, however, submits that once discretion has been exercised by the appellate authority while deciding the stay application, the petitioner has no case in his favour for grant of any interim relief.
We have heard the parties.
Be that as it may, the present petition is disposed of directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal within three weeks from the date of production of copy of this order. As stay application has already been rejected by the authority after due application of mind, we are not inclined to grant any interim relief to the petitioner.
The petitioner is obliged to submit a copy of this order before the appellate authority and to obtain acknowledgement. Registry shall also send a copy of this order to the concerned Commissioner.
It is made clear that this Court has observed nothing on the merit of the case and the appellate authority to pass order in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioners along with a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 9.2.2021 Meenu/S.K.
Digitally signed by Justice Pritinker Digitally signed by Justice Deepak Diwaker Verma Date: 2021.02.10 10:47:25 IST Date: 2021.02.10 10:55:11 IST Reason: Document Owner Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellate authority should be directed to decide the pending appeal within a specified time frame?
Danish
State of U.P.
Pritinker Diwaker
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
