Disposed

Mohammad Wahid v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2024/172/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Ambedkar Nagar to decide the applicant's pending criminal case within six months without unnecessary adjournments, noting that mere pendency does not serve litigation purposes.

What did the court decide?

Trial court directed to decide the criminal case within six months without unnecessary adjournments, subject to legal impediments or higher court stays.

Mohammad Wahid Vs the State of U.P. Thru… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50478

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 172 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohammad Wahid Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd.Yasin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking a direction to the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar to decide the Criminal Case No.86 of 2019 arising out of case crime no.201 of 2018 under Section 506, 427 IPC police station Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar expeditiously.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a positive direction be given to the trial court to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously, without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has no objection on the prayer made by the learned counsel for the case and submits that a positive direction be given to the trial court to decide the case of the applicant, as merely keeping pending the same by the trial court does not suffice any purpose of the litigation.

¶9

After considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the trial court is directed to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously, say within six months, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, from the date of filing of the certified copy of this order, unless

¶10

there is some legal impediment or unless there is any order passed by the higher court staying the proceedings of the case.

¶11

With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of finally.

¶12

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶13

(Om Prakash Shukla, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 25.7.2024 Arnima

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Wahid v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Wahid v. the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ashok Soni Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Surendra @ Shalendra Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Sunil Kumar Srivastava Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Deepak Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko and 5 Others

Gaurav Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Krishna Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another