Disposed¶13

Renu Alias Renu Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2025A482/32590/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expedition of criminal trial; direction to decide case within stipulated period refused; time-bound schedule not fixed; Section 482 application; Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC; Section 3/4 D.P. Act; Case No.76 of 2022; Case Crime No.268 of 2021; P.S. Khandauli, District Agra; Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.3, Agra; offence against women; no unnecessary adjournments; status report dated 13.02.2025; charges framed; High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No.3589 of 2023 (29.02.2024), para 32; 2025:AHC:42142; order dated 21.3.2025.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with the observation/expectation that the court below decide Case No.76 of 2022 expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party; no time-bound or stipulated period was fixed. ¶13

Renu Alias Renu Devi vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should direct the court below to expedite and decide Case No.76 of 2022 (arising out of Case Crime No.268 of 2021) within a stipulated period.

¶7

Court's answer

Since the complaint involves an offence committed against women, it is expected from the court below that it will decide the case expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Consistent with the Apex Court's observation in High Court Bar Association (supra) that constitutional courts should not normally direct expeditious trial in a time-bound manner, the Court did not fix a stipulated/time-bound period and confined itself to expressing an expectation of expeditious disposal.

¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.) disposed of an application (case type 'APPLICATION U/S 482', No. 32590 of 2024) praying for a direction to the court below to expedite and decide Case No.76 of 2022 (State Vs. Rahul Singh Bhargar & others), arising out of Case Crime No.268 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Khandauli, District Agra, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Agra. The Court noted its earlier order dated 09.01.2025 calling for a status report, and the report dated 13.02.2025 that charges stand framed and the matter is being tried expeditiously. Referring to the Apex Court's decision in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (Criminal Appeal No.3589 of 2023, decided 29.02.2024), particularly paragraph 32, that constitutional courts should not normally fix a time-bound schedule for disposal of cases, the Court nevertheless, considering that the complaint concerned an offence committed against women, expressed the expectation that the court below decide the case expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party, and disposed of the application.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42142

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32590 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Renu Alias Renu Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been filed with prayer to direct learned court below to expedite and decide the Case No.76 of 2022 (State Vs. Rahul Singh Bhargar & others), arising out of Case Crime No.268 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Khandauli, District Agra, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Agra, within stipulated period.

¶8

From perusal of order sheet, it appears that this Court vide order dated 09.01.2025, directed the court below to submit its report regarding status of trial in the proceeding in question.

¶9

In pursuance of order dated 09.01.2025, the court below submitted its report dated 13.02.2025 mentioning therein that the charges have been made against the accused persons and the court below is trying to conclude the matter, expeditiously.

¶10

Though, Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, Criminal Appeal No.3589 of 2023 dated 29.02.2024 , observed that High Courts should not normally direct for expediting the trial in time bound manner. Paragraph 32 of High Court Bar Association (supra) is being quoted as under:-

¶11

"32. Therefore, constitutional Courts should not normally fix a time-bound schedule for disposal of cases pending in any Court. The pattern of pendency of various categories of cases pending in every Court, including High Courts, is different. The situation at the grassroots level is better known to the judges of the concerned Courts. Therefore, the issue of giving out-of- turn priority to certain cases should be best left to the concerned Courts. The orders fixing the outer limit for the disposal of cases should be passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations."

¶12

However, considering the fact that the complaint in question had been filed for the offence committed against women, therefore, it is expected from the court below that it will decide the the same expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶13

With the above observation, present application is disposed of .

¶14

Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Atul

¶15

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

Renu Alias Renu Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renu Alias Renu Devi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Devi vs State of U.P. and Another

Nakki Qureshi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Anothaer

Smt. Savita Devi and 2 Others vs State of Up and 5 Others

Rajeev Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Subhash Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. and 2 Others