Allowed

Samiullah v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2023A483/566/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, under Section 483 Cr.P.C., allowed the applicant's application to expedite pending proceedings. The Court directed the Judicial Magistrate to conclude the case expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments, fixed short dates, and authorized coercive measures against defaulting prosecution witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Direction to trial court to conclude proceedings expeditiously, fix short dates, avoid unnecessary adjournments on heavy costs, and take coercive measures to produce witnesses.

Samiullah Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 566 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Samiullah Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh,Najakat Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the trial court to conclude the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4579 of 2018, State vs. Samiullah and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 94 of 2016, under Sections 323, 504, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Ghughali, District Maharajganj pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj, expeditiously.

¶7

A perusal of the order-sheet of the trial court shows that the Magistrate has taken cognizance on 27.07.2018 and summons were issued. On 31.07.2018 accused Samiullah and Aliuddin appeared before the Court, and, on being presented application for bail, they were admitted to bail. Out of three accused, till date, only two have appeared before the Trial Court.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Magistrate has taken cognizance on 27.07.2018 and summoned the accused. It is further submitted since the case has been registered, it is lingering on without any order of moment being passed.

¶9

Looking to the nature of the order that this Court proposes to pass, issue of notice to opposite party no. 2 is dispensed with inasmuch as rights of parties are not being determined here in any manner.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the case is pending since the year 2018. Applicant is appearing before the Trial Court regularly but there is no material progress in the case. This Court thinks that proceedings need to be expedited and decided within a specified time according to the business of the Court where the case is pending.

¶11

In the circumstances, the Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj is directed to proceed with the aforesaid case, fixing short dates and without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, unless it is unavoidable that too on heavy costs, and endeavour to conclude the proceedings of the aforesaid case expeditiously. It is further directed that all prosecution witnesses, if they do not appear on the service of summons, bailable warrants and other coercive measures shall be taken against them as per law. It shall be the duty of the Police to execute the summons and other processes issued against them and produce all prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed for their evidence.

¶12

In view of the aforesaid directions, the application is allowed .

¶13

It is made clear that anything said in this order shall not affect the rights of both parties either way and the Trial Court shall be free to decide the case in accordance with law and the evidence led by parties unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.2.2023 Brijesh Maurya

¶15

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

Samiullah v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samiullah v. State 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monu @ Ghanghru Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S Sunil Plastic Industries Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shikha Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Shani Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Niharika Chaubey @ Neha Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Saurabh Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and Another