Dismissed

Abdul Kayum Ansari v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2023A482/31525/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking speedy trial of a pending criminal case. The court held that since charges were not framed, no direction to expedite trial could be given, and the petition was devoid of merit. (AHC)

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as devoid of merit.

Abdul Kayum Ansari Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:172385

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31525 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Abdul Kayum Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to direct the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi to decide/dispose of the Case No. 7039 of 2015 (State Vs. Abdul Salim Ansari and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 34 of 2015, under Sections 420 and 406 IPC, P.S. Navabad, District Jhansi expeditiously within stipulated period.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is the first informant in the instant case. He has further submitted that cognizance in the instant case against the accused has been taken by the court below on 13.07.2015, however despite lapse of about eight years, the trial has not yet been concluded and is progressing at snail pace, as such a direction be given to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same within the stipulated period.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that in the instant case, charges have not yet been framed, as such the trial has not yet commenced, therefore at this stage trial cannot be expedited.

¶10

Having considered the rival submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court stating therein that there must be cogent and compelling reasons to expedite the proceedings, which might upset the calendar and schedule of the court below and might result in assigning an unwarranted priority to that particular case over and above other cases pending

¶11

in that Court. Progression of such other cases might suffer for no reason and none of the faults of the litigants involved therein. Such petition for expediting the proceeding and concluding the trial within stipulated period is to be considered from all angles.

¶12

In the instant case, charges have not been framed against accused persons and as such, no direction to expedite the trial and conclude the same within stipulated period can be given in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶13

In view of the above, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶14

Order Date :- 25.8.2023 Subham

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SUBHAM KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abdul Kayum Ansari v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Kayum Ansari v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Ujjawal Singh @ Vicky and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Madhubala Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Umesh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anuj Bharti and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suneel Kumar Arora and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others