Disposed

Heera Lal v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2022A482/19138/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the trial court to conclude a pending complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act within three months, emphasizing the mandate for expeditious trial under Section 143(3) and prohibiting unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to decide the complaint case within three months from service of the certified copy of this order.

Heera Lal Vs State of U.P and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19138 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Heera Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gagan Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶5

The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner for directing the court below to expedite the complaint case no. 1003/2012 (Hiralal vs. Yogesh Wiz) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, P.S.- Hariparvat, District Agra, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court no. 11, Agra.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the complaint case is pending before the learned trial court since the year 2012 and period of more than nine years have been passed but the trial has yet not been concluded. It is further submitted that Section 143 (3) of the Act of 1881 provides that a trial shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible making all possible endeavour to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint, thus, it is prayed that a direction may be given to the trial court to decide the complaint within three months.

¶7

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer but unable to dispute the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Section 143 (3) of the Negotiable Instrument Act is reproduced hereunder:-

¶9

"Every trial under this section shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint."

¶10

Perusal of the aforesaid manifests that Section 143 (3) of the Act of 1881 mandates that every trial shall be concluded within six months from the date of filing of the complaint but in the present case, the trial is pending before the court below since the year 2012 i.e. more than nine years.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court no. 11, Agra is directed to decide the the complaint case no. 1003/2012 (Hiralal vs. Yogesh Wiz) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, P.S.Hariparvat, District Agra, within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is served before

¶12

it making all possible endeavour. It is made clear that unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties shall not be given and if any adjournment is sought, a short date may be fixed in the case.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.4.2022 Nitesh

¶15

Digitally signed by NITESH KUMAR TEWARY Date: 2022.04.13 09:14:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Heera Lal v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Heera Lal 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

Ranveer and 13 Others Vs State of U.P. And Another

Mr. Deepak Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shahanavaj Khan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Jaiswal and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Kumar and Anothers Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Musharraf Azam Vs State of U.P. and Another