Allowed

Victim v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2022A482/15798/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by a victim. It directed the trial court to conclude the pending criminal case within a time-bound period. The Court imposed a fine of Rs. 2,500 per day for seeking unnecessary adjournments or delay caused by accused conduct.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Court below to decide the pending criminal case with all expedition; fine of Rs. 2,500 per day imposed for unnecessary adjournments or delay.

Victim Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15798 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Victim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State.

¶6

This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by victim as the first informant Irfan Hussain (father of victim) has died. It is by now well settled that criminal proceedings can be maintained by legal representative.

¶7

Applicant victim has approached this Court for a direction to court concerned to decide Case No. 22056 of 2018 (State Vs. Danish and Others) under sections 498A, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District Agra expeditiously and conclude the same within a time bound period.

¶8

At the very outset, learned A.G.A. contends that criminal case giving rise to this application is of the year 2018 itself. He, therefore, contends that facts of the present case are not so clinching so as to direct the Court concerned for disposal of aforementioned case within a time bound period.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant invited the attention of Court to the order sheet. He contends that opposite parties-2, 3, 4 and 5 who are charge sheeted accused, are deliberately delaying the trial of aforementioned case. Upon perusal of order sheet, apprehension of learned counsel for applicant is found correct.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record,this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping this application pending. Interest of justice shall better be served in case a direction is issued to court below to proceed with above mentioned case with all expedition.

¶11

In view of aforesaid, this application is finally disposed of, with a direction to Court below to decide Case No. 22056 of 2018 (State Vs. Danish and Others) under sections 498A, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Sadar

¶12

Bazar, District Agra, with all expedition without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. In case adjournment is sought or matter cannot proceed on account of conduct of accused, Court concerned shall impose fine of Rs. 2,500/- per day, which shall be paid to the applicant victim.

¶13

Order Date :- 4.7.2022 Arshad

¶14

Digitally signed by ARSHAD MAHMOOD Date: 2022.07.06 09:35:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Victim v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Victim v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

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

Anurag Dixit Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Begum Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Digvijay Nath Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gussu@ Mohd Ezaz Sarvar Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another