Disposed¶14

Mamta Alias Rama Devi v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2025A483/1365/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 483 CrPC; expeditious disposal; time-bound direction; one month; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act; Section 31; Section 23 interim maintenance Rs. 2,000 per month; ex-parte since 7.6.2023; Special Chief Judicial Magistrate Agra; Police Station Sikandra District Agra; no unnecessary adjournment; stakeholders bound to assist; aggrieved wife; Mamta Alias Rama Devi v. State of U.P.; 2025:AHC:4782; order dated 9.1.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Court concerned (Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra) to dispose of Misc. Case No. 211 of 2018 within one month from production of a certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment; bar on unnecessary adjournments; all stakeholders (police, execution authorities, advocates, parties, staff) bound to assist the Court. ¶14

Mamta Alias Rama Devi vs State of U.P. and 6 Others — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should direct the court concerned (Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra) to decide Misc. Case No. 211 of 2018 under Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act expeditiously within a stipulated period.

¶6

Court's answer

The Court concerned is directed to make all endeavours for expeditious disposal of Misc. Case No. 211 of 2018 within one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before it, if there is no legal impediment.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

No unnecessary adjournment shall be sought or granted in the matter.

¶12

Key takeaways

Besides the Presiding Officer, all stakeholders — police and execution authorities, advocates, parties to the case, staff etc. — are bound by the order and responsible to assist the Court in every manner for expeditious disposal of the case.ratio¶13
Matters under the Domestic Violence Act demand more sensitivity on the part of the Court.obiter¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.) disposed of an application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. seeking expeditious disposal of Misc. Case No. 211 of 2018 (Section 31, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act), P.S. Sikandra, District Agra, pending before the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra. Observing that the case had proceeded ex-parte on 7.6.2023 and ex-parte arguments remained unheard even after one year and six months, and that Domestic Violence Act matters demand greater judicial sensitivity, the Court directed disposal within one month from production of a certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment, barred unnecessary adjournments, and bound all stakeholders — police and execution authorities, advocates, parties and staff — to assist the Court. Background: the trial court's order dated 17.3.2023 had partly allowed the applicant's Section 23 DV Act application, directing opposite party no.2 to pay Rs. 2,000/- per month maintenance, which according to counsel remains unpaid.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:4782

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 1365 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mamta Alias Rama Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

This application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to direct the court concerned to decide the Misc. Case No. 211 of 2018, under Section 31 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, Police Station Sikandra, District Agra pending in the Court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, expeditiously within a stipulated period.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a lady and aggrieved wife. She is having no means for her livelihood and is at the verge of starvation. An application under Section 23 Domestic Violence Act was moved by the applicant against her husband and in-laws which was allowed partly by the trial court vide order dated 17.3.2023 directing the opposite party no.2 to pay Rs. 2,000/- per month for maintenance etc. of the applicant. It is also submitted that no money has been paid to the applicant by the opposite party no.2 pursuant to the said direction of the Court concerned so far.

¶9

Learned AGA opposed the prayer.

¶10

I have considered the submissions and perused the entire record.

¶11

It reveals from the perusal of the copies of the order sheets that the applicant before this Court is aggrieved wife. Case was proceeded ex-parte on 7.6.2023 by the trial court and it is very strange that even lapse of one year and six months the trial court got no time to hear ex-parte argument in this matter. The matters under Domestic Violence Act demand some more sensitivity on the part of the Court. Hence, the Court concerned is directed to make all endeavours for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid case

¶12

within one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it, if there is no legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted.

¶13

It is also made clear that the Court / Presiding Officer is not the only stake holder of the trial and disposal of a case, hence, besides the P.O. concerned, all the stake holders i.e. police and execution authorities, advocates, parties to the case, staff etc. are also made bound by this order and it will be their responsibility also to assist the Court in every manner for the expeditious disposal of this case.

¶14

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 9.1.2025 safi

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mamta Alias Rama Devi v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mamta Alias Rama Devi v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Punam Dubey vs State of U.P. and Another

Girish Upadhyay and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rijwana Bano vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin Saini vs State of U.P. and Another

Daadu @ Chelaram vs State of Up

Jitendra Singh Patel vs State of U.P. and Another