Disposed

Gufran Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2024/449/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a Section 483 Cr.P.C. application urging expeditious disposal of a pending criminal case. The Court directed the trial court to conclude the trial quickly without unnecessary adjournments, noting that the applicant's counsel appeared only pro forma while the State opposed the stay.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to dispose of the case expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments, if no legal impediment exists.

Gufran Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:74454

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 449 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Gufran Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶6

1. Case called out.

¶7

2. Learned A.G.A. for the State is present. However, no one has appeared on behalf of the applicant despite the fact that the name of Sri Dinesh Kumar Tiwari, Advocate, has been shown in the cause list.

¶8

3. In view of the order, which is proposed to be passed today, notice to opposite party No.2 is hereby dispensed with.

¶9

4. Having regard to the fact that this application came to be filed on 02.07.2024, it is proposed to be disposed of on its own merit with the assistance of learned A.G.A.

¶10

5. The only innocuous prayer made in the present application filed under Section 483 Cr.P.C. is that the learned trial court/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.17, Sultanpur be directed to decide the Criminal Case No.1849 of 2020 (State

¶11

vs. Salman Khan), arising out of charge sheet No.1 of 2020 dated 02.05.2020 in prusuance of F.I.R. No.289 of 2019, under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A I.P.C., Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur, expeditiously and preferably within a time bound manner.

¶12

6. From perusal of record, it transpires that the trial is not being completed because adjournments have been granted frequently. Therefore, a request has been made to issue a direction to dispose of the aforesaid case in a time bound manner.

¶13

7. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer, however, he could not dispute the fact that the trial of aforesaid case should be concluded as early as possible.

¶14

8. Having heardlearned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the entire record, it appears that the adjournments have been granted frequently and no substantial progress has been made so far to conclude the Criminal Case No.1849 of 2020 (State vs. Salman Khan), arising out of charge sheet No.1 of 2020 dated 02.05.2020 in prusuance of F.I.R. No.289 of 2019, under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A I.P.C., Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur.

¶15

9. Therefore, to secure ends of justice, the present application is finally disposed of with the direction to the concerned learned trial court to dispose of the aforesaid case expeditiously without

¶16

granting any unnecessary adjournment to the parties, in accordance with law, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶17

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 12.11.2024 cks/-

¶19

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

Gufran Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gufran Ahmad v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Juvenile Accused Anand Bihari Thru. Mother Smt. Lilawati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Mrs. Om Shri Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Pawan Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Vaishnav Upadhyay Alias Gudiya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Fauji Alias Om Prakash Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Pankaj Singh Priydarshi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another