Rajkaran Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
In a PIL under Article 226, the High Court directed the Special Judge (SC/ST Act) to decide a pending trial involving the petitioner within a stipulated period without granting unnecessary adjournments.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:220936
Court No. - 83
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9247 of 2023
Petitioner :- Rajkaran Sharma Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar,Nitesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Nitesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused material on record.
The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed to issue a direction to Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Ghaziabad to decide the Special Trial NO. 2400 of 2022 (Smt. Neetu vs. Rajkaran Pandit), under Section 452, 323, 506 and 354 of IPC and under Section 3(1) 10 of SC/ST Act within stipulated period.
Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the court below to decide the aforesaid special trial in accordance with law expeditiously without granting any unnecessary or long adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no other legal impediment.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of finally.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court should direct the Lower Court to decide the special trial under the SC/ST Act expeditiously.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Rajkaran Sharma
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Pachori Sanjay Kumar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- A227/9247/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court