Disposed

Smt. Diksha Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2023A482/42133/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the applicant sought a direction for the trial court to ensure the presence of accused-opposite parties whose non-appearance had stalled the trial. The High Court directed the trial court to take appropriate steps under Chapter VI of CrPC to secure their presence.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to ensure the presence of the accused-opposite parties under Chapter VI of CrPC.

Smt. Diksha Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and 5… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228669

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42133 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Diksha Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nandini Pandey,Sanjay Dube,Ved Prakash Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Gyanendra Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. No one appears for the opposite party nos. 2 to 6.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to direct the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Room No. 21, Allahabad to conclude the trial of Case No. 66 of 2021 titled as State Vs. Shiv Pratap Shukla and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 412 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj, pending before him.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that petitioner had lodged an FIR, which was registered as Case Crime No. 412 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act at P.S. Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj on 11.11.2019 against opposite party nos. 2 to 6. He submits that after filing of the charge-sheet, the trial court took cognizance on 05.04.2021 and the opposite party nos. 2 to 6 were enlarged on bail on 25.11.2021. Since then, the accused-opposite parties have not appeared before the court below, and because of non-appearance of the accused, the trial of the instant FIR has almost put to hold. He

¶9

therefore submits that in the give facts and circumstances, court below may be directed to take appropriate steps to ensure presence of the accused-opposite parties.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the present application is disposed of with a direction upon trial court concerned to take appropriate steps in accordance with Chapter VI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for ensuring presence of accused-opposite parties.

¶11

Order Date :- 2.12.2023 Shafique

¶12

(Vinod Diwakar, J.)

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SAFIKUR RAHAMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Diksha Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Diksha Dwivedi v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Rajpati Giri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Bakshi Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Sanjay Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Istiyak and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Shiv Kumar Pandey @ Munna Pandey Vs State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Om Prakash Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others