Single judge directed the trial court to conclude the pending criminal complaint case expeditiously within nine months due to the applicant's senior citizen status and accuseds' non-cooperation.
Directed trial court to conclude trial within nine months from date of production of certified copy.
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. - 87
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 79 of 2022
Applicant :- Brijraj Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajnish Dubey,Rajiv Lochan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Singh Sengar
Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Singh Sengar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I for the State.
By way of the present application, applicant has made a prayer to direct the court below to conclude the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2602 of 2019, under Sections 452, 504 and 392 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/JM, Court No.11, District Deoria, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is the complainant of the case and he is 88 years old and infirm person and his complaint is pending since 2019 and even till date accused persons of the case did not appear before the trial court.
Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that although the summoning order was passed against the accused persons on 7.3.2020 and accused persons, i.e., opposite parties no.2 to 5 challenged the same before this Court vide Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.22157 of 2021 and
this Court on 14.2.2022 refused to indulge into the matter and directed opposite parties no.2 to 5 to claim discharge. He next submitted that although opposite parties no.2 to 5 moved an application under Section 245((2) Cr.P.C. but the prayer of the application moved by opposite parties no.2 to 5 shows that they did not claim discharge rather they made a prayer to cancel the summoning order earlier passed against them and their application is still pending. He next submitted that the accused persons of the present case are not cooperating with the trial and it is necessary and desirable to direct the court below to conclude the trial of the case, expeditiously, preferably within a stipulated period of three months.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 vehemently opposed the contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant that opposite parties no.2 to 5 are delaying the proceeding of the case and submitted that opposite parties no.2 to 5 are fully cooperating with trial. However, learned counsel for opposite parties no.2 to 5 and the learned AGA submitted that they are having no objection if any such direction is given to the court below to conclude the proceedings, expeditiously, in accordance with law.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
Applicant is the complaint of the present case and as per the averments made in paragraph-25 of the afÏdavit filed in support of the present application,
he is senior citizen aged about 88 years. The complaint filed by applicant is pending for the last about three years and accused persons of the present matter although challenged the summoning order before this Court but they could not succeed and till date they do not even appear before the court concerned, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is directed that the trial court shall conclude the trial of the case, expeditiously, preferably within a period of nine months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order strictly in accordance with law, without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment.
The instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.9.2022 SKM
Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.09.10 14:42:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court should be directed to conclude the pending case expeditiously given the applicant's advanced age and the accused's non-appearance.
Brijraj Singh
State Of U.P
4 Others
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
