The High Court rejected an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking time to place the record of a habeas corpus petition before a trial court, dismissing it as misconceived and a vehicle for delay.
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. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5147 of 2023
Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Narayan Singh (Kushwaha), learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application has been filed assailing the order dated 17.01.2023 vide which the application moved by the applicant for seeking time for placing the record of habeas corpus petition has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that habeas corpus petition was filed before this Hon'ble Court and the record of the aforesaid petition were to be placed before the trial Court for proper adjudication of the matter, therefore, an application was moved before the Court concerned on 09.11.2022 but the Court concerned without application of judicial mind has rejected the application in a mechanical manner.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that there is no illegality and infirmity in the order of learned trial Court as the same has been passed after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. He further submits that ample time was given to the applicant to place the record of habeas corpus petition, however, when the same was not placed, as per direction of the Hon'ble High Court, the application has been decided. The Court concerned while rejecting the application has also mentioned that
the aforesaid application is nothing but a via media to delay the proceedings, which are pending since 2014. He further submits that other submission made by learned counsel for the applicant related to disputed questions of fact, which cannot be seen here.
In view of the above, the application being misconceived, is rejected.
Order Date :- 3.4.2023
Rahul.
Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Deepak
State of U.P.
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
