The applicant sought directions under Section 483 CrPC to expedite pending trial proceedings. The court found the delay was bona fide and noted the summary nature of the trial, dismissing the application.
Application for issuance of directions to expedite trial proceedings was dismissed.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:145408
Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 536 of 2024
Applicant :- Tha Girraj Ji Maharaj Mukharbind Mukut Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.
Complainant-Applicant has approached this Court through this application under Section 483 Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of directions to the Additional Court, Mathura to expedite and conclude the proceedings of Case No. 3530 of 2018, titled The Girraj Ji Vs. Shri Niwas, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station Govardhan, District Mathura, in a stipulated period.
Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that subject case was filed by applicant on 17.10.2018, but the proceedings in the case are still pending adjudication and the trial is not making any headway. Learned counsel for applicant prays that in view of the nature of the offences, it would be in the interest of justice, if directions are issued to the trial court to decide the above mentioned case in a specific time frame.
During the course of hearing, it is not disputed by learned counsel that trial proceedings in the above case were stayed by this Court vide order dated 14.2.2020 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 6588 of 2020, and the proceedings of the case have again commenced vide order dated 16.7.2022, and the summons were issued to the accused.
Concededly, the concession of bail was extended to the accused vide order dated 23.2.2024, and thereafter, the case has been adjourned for various reasons including the absence of the complainant, suspension of work by lawyers or exemption by accused from personal appearance.
The delay in conclusion of trial is bona fide, and keeping in view the nature of the trial, which is summary, no exceptional ground is made out for expediting the trial proceedings in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shaikh Uzma Feroz
Hussain Vs. The State of Maharashtra, MANU/ SCOR/ 145020/ 2023 .
The application fails and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 6.9.2024 P.S.Parihar
Digitally signed by :- POORAN SINGH PARIHAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether directions expediting the trial proceedings of a case under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act are called for in this instance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shaikh Uzma FerozReferred¶10
Hussain Vs. The State of MaharashtraReferred¶10
Hussain Vs. The State of Maharashtra, MANU/ SCOR/ 145020/ 2023
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tha Girraj Ji Maharaj Mukharbind Mukut
State of U.P.
Manoj Bajaj
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
