Krishna Kumar Gupta Vs the Special Judge S.C./S.T.Act/a.D.J. Bahraich and Ors. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Krishna Kumar Gupta Vs the Special Judge S.C./S.T.Act/a.D.J. Bahraich and Ors. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed off in the petitioner's favour: both orders (dated 31.10.2013 and 16.05.2015) set aside; trial court directed to permit the petitioner to adduce remaining evidence and conclude proceedings preferably within one year without unnecessary adjournments. Earlier, delay was condoned, the recall of the order dated 15.07.2022 was allowed, and the writ petition was restored to its file and number.

Issue for consideration

Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application to adduce evidence by examining PW-4 (order dated 31.10.2013) and the dismissal of the revision against it (order dated 16.05.2015) were sustainable. +1 more

Court's answer

The court below took a very narrow view in not allowing the examination of PW-4, who was to be examined by the petitioner, and the revisional court also took a very narrow view.

Ratio / Principle

Delay condonation application allowed; delay in filing the recall application condoned; recall application allowed; writ petition restored to its file and number.

Key takeaways

Since the case is pending since long, both the orders (dated 31.10.2013 and 16.05.2015) are set aside; the trial court is directed to permit the petitioner to adduce the remaining evidence and conclude the proceedings with all expedition, preferably within one year from production of a certified copy of the order, without giving unnecessary adjournments to any party.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Pankabhatia... Pankaj Bhatia, J.) — Recall application (I.A. No.15 of 2023) and delay condonation application (I.A. No.14 of 2023) allowed; order dated 15.07.2022 recalled and WRIT - A No. 1000068 of 2015 restored. On merits, the trial court's order dated 31.10.2013 closing the examination of PW-4 (who could not appear as his train was delayed) and the revisional court's order dated 16.05.2015 dismissing the revision were found to take 'a very narrow view' and were set aside; the trial court was directed to permit the petitioner to adduce the remaining evidence and conclude the proceedings with expedition, preferably within one year, without unnecessary adjournments. Writ petition disposed off accordingly on 20.11.2024.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:76667

Court No. - 7

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1000068 of 2015

Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Gupta

Respondent :- The Special Judge S.C./S.T.Act/A.D.J. Bahraich And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Brijesh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- P K Jaiswal

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Order on I.A. No.15 of 2023 (Recall Application) and I.A. No.14 of 2023 (Delay Condonation Application)

1 . The recall application have been filed along with delay condonation application seeking recall of the order dated 15.07.2022.

2 . The cause shown is sufficient. The application of delay condonation is allowed . The delay in filing recall application is condoned. The recall application is also allowed . The writ petition is restored to its file and number.

Order on main petition

3 . The writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31.10.2013 whereby, the application of the petitioner for adducing evidence by the witness was rejected and the revision filed against the said order is also dismissed vide order dated 16.05.2015.

4 . The facts in brief are that the petitioner filed SCC Suit No.3 of 2022, however, as one of the witnesses P.W.-4 could not be present as his train got delayed, his right of examination was closed.

5 . A perusal of the said order reveals that the court below has taken a very narrow view in not allowing the examination of PW-4, who was to be examined by the petitioner and the revisional court has also taken a very narrow view.

6 . Considering the fact that the case is pending since long, both the orders are set aside. The trial court is directed to permit the petitioner to adduce the remaining evidence and concluded the proceedings with all expedition preferably within a period of one years from the date of production of a certified copy of this

order without giving any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties.

7 . The writ petition is disposed off in the above terms.

Order Date :- 20.11.2024 akverma

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench