Disposed

Smt. Hashmi Sheikh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 May 2022A482/10808/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought a direction for the expeditious disposal of a pending Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance case filed in 2019, which had been frequently adjourned. The court relied on Supreme Court precedents regarding the fundamental right to speedy trial and ordered the lower court to decide the matter within four months without unnecessary adjournments before dismissing this petition.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the lower court to decide the Section 125 Cr.P.C. case within four months without granting unnecessary adjournments.

Smt. Hashmi Sheikh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10808 of 2022 Applicant :- Smt. Hashmi Sheikh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner and learned Government Advocate for the State.

¶4

The present petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the learned Additional Principal Judge - IV, Family Court, Allahabad to decide the Case No.935 of 2019, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., expeditiously within stipulated period.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner/ applicant has submitted that the applicant has filed a Case No.935 of 2019, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the year 2019 and since then the matter is frequently being adjourned for one reason or the other.

¶6

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that the court below may be directed to decide the matter within the stipulated time frame, as this Court may deem fit and proper.

¶7

Learned AGA has no objection to the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner.

¶8

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record and the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the Case of Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994) 3 SCC 569 and in the Case of Mangal Singh vs. Kishan Singh (2009) 17 SCC 303 , wherein it has been held that the right of speedy trial is facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The concept of speedy trial is to be read in Article 21 of Constitution of India as essential part of fundamental right. It is an undisputed fact in the present case that the case is pending since 2019 and more than 2 years have been passed. Such delay in deciding the matter is nothing but to deprive the applicant to get speedy justice.

¶9

In view of discussion made hereinabove and in the light of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kartar Singh (Supra ) and Mangal Singh (Supra) , learned court below is expected to decide Case No.935 of 2019, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., pending in the court of Additional Principal Judge - IV, Family Court, Allahabad, expeditiously say within a period of four months in accordance with law, if there is no other legal impediment, from the date of certified copy of this order is served and without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties and if any adjournment is sought by either of the parties, some short date may be given.

¶10

In view of above, the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of finally.

¶11

Order Date :- 27.5.2022 S. Kumar

¶12

Digitally signed by SANTOSH KUMAR Date: 2022.05.31 09:23:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Hashmi Sheikh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Hashmi Sheikh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Rekha Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ved Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Katiyar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another