Disposed

Parshuram Yadav v. State of U. P. Thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U. P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2023A482/18253/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge directed the trial court to dispose of the pending criminal trial under Section 376 IPC expeditiously, issuing a reasoned order without adjournments after the prosecutrix avoided proceedings. The current application was disposed without merit observations.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Additional Session Judge to decide the pending trial expeditiously by a reasoned order.

Parshuram Yadav Vs State of U. P. Thr… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155960

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18253 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Parshuram Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U. P. Thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Of U. P. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Shitlesh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

Instant application has been filed beseeching expeditious disposal of Case No. 491 of 2022 (State Vs. Parshuram), arising out of Case Crime No. 114 of 2021, under Section 376, 493, 313, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Rampur District- Rampur, pending in the Court of Additional Session Judge, F.T.C., Court No.1, Mau.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that opposite party no. 1 lodged an F.I.R., being Case Crime No. 0114 of 2021, leveling allegation of rape and molestation against the present applicant. In the aforesaid matter charge sheet was submitted on 09.01.2022 and the charges were framed on 23.03.2023. Thereafter, throughout dates are being fixed for evidence of witnesses, however, the prosecutrix is avoiding the court proceedings.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. states that he has no objection in case the aforesaid case is directed to be decided expeditiously. It is further contended that learned trial court may be directed to adhere the provisions as enunciated under Section 309 Cr.P.C.

¶11

In this conspectus as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present application, without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the present application, with a direction to the Additional Session Judge, F.T.C., Court No.1, Mau, before whom the trial is pending

¶12

consideration, to decide the same expeditiously, as early as possible.

¶13

It is expected that it should be decided by reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned without granting unnecessary adjournments.

¶14

With the aforesaid direction, present application is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 3.8.2023 Pkb/

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD KUMAR BAJPAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Parshuram Yadav v. State of U. P. Thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U. P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parshuram Yadav v. State of U. P. Thr. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kripa Shankar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunita Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munish Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Deb Priya Das Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manna and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another