Disposed¶12

Raj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jan 2025A483/2540/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application U/S 483 No. 2540 of 2024, Allahabad High Court, order dated 15.1.2025, Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:9278; expeditious disposal of long-pending Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act complaint (2012, New No.493 of 2019) at Additional Court, Varanasi; directions to ensure accused appearance, curb adjournments/exemptions, six-month disposal timeline, shared responsibility of stake holders; applicant Raj Kumar Singh represented by Bhupesh Pathak and Surya Bhan Dubey; G.A. for State.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with directions to the trial court to secure the accused's appearance, normally refuse adjournments or exemptions, and endeavour expeditious disposal of the Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act complaint within six months absent legal impediment; all stake holders made responsible to assist the court.

Raj Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Prayer to direct the court concerned to decide Complaint Case No.3181 of 2012 (New No.493 of 2019), Raj Kumar Singh Vs. Dinesh Kumar, under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, expeditiously within a stipulated period.

¶6

Court's answer

The Court concerned is directed to make all possible endeavours and take effective steps to ensure the appearance of the accused person before the court.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

On the dates fixed by the trial court the accused shall appear, and no adjournment or exemption from appearance will normally be granted to any accused on any ground whatsoever.

¶9

Key takeaways

All endeavours shall be made by the court concerned for expeditious disposal of the case within six months, if there is no legal impediment.ratio¶9
Besides the Presiding Officer, all stake holders - police and executive authorities, counsels, parties and staff - are bound by the order and bear responsibility to assist the court in every manner for expeditious disposal.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.) disposed of an application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. praying for expeditious decision of Complaint Case No.3181 of 2012 (New No.493 of 2019), Raj Kumar Singh Vs. Dinesh Kumar, under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi, pending before the Additional Court, Varanasi, where almost twelve years had passed and the case stood at cross-examination of P.W.1. Directing that the trial court make all possible endeavours to ensure the accused's appearance, that no adjournment or exemption for appearance be normally granted on any ground, and that the case be disposed of expeditiously within six months absent legal impediment, the court additionally bound all stake holders (police, executive authorities, counsel, parties and staff) to assist in expeditious disposal.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9278

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 2540 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupesh Pathak,Surya Bhan Dubey 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 Case No.3181 of 2012, New No.493 of 2019 (Raj Kumar Singh Vs. Dinesh Kumar) under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi pending before the Additional Court, Varanasi, expeditiously within a stipulated period.

¶7

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

¶8

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the said case has been filed by the applicant / complainant under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act in 2012 and the court concerned after fixing several dates in matter, transferred the case to the court of Addl. Court, Varanasi and new number was allotted to it. Now the case is at the stage of cross-examination of P.W.1. Accused are not cooperating with the court and only dates are being fixed for appearance. Almost 12 years have been passed and it has not been decided as yet. Therefore, prayer has been made to decide the aforesaid complaint case expeditiously within a stipulated period.

¶9

In the circumstances, the Court concerned is directed to make all possible endeavours and effective steps to ensure the appearance of the accused person before the court. It is also directed that on the date fixed by the trial court the accused person shall appear before the Court and no adjournment or exemption for appearance will normally be granted to any of the accused person on any ground whatsoever and thereafter all endeavours shall be made by the court concerned for expeditious disposal of the case within six months, if there is no legal impediment.

¶10

It is also made clear that the Court / Presiding Officer is not the

¶11

only stake holder in the trial and disposal of a case, hence, besides the P.O. concerned, all the stake holders i.e. police and executive authorities, counsels, parties to the case, staff 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.

¶12

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 15.1.2025 ss

¶14

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Similar cases

Kartikey Gupta vs State of Up and Another

Amit Goel vs State of U.P through Its Principal Secretary (Home) and Another

Kalamuddin Alias Kalamu vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhay Dubey Alias Mathri vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Neta @ Geeta and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Rahul Negi vs State of U.P. and Another