Nayan Kamal Agarwal v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2025CRLA/8560/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal against summoning order; Sections 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(5A) SC/ST Act; Special Judge SC/ST Act Hathras; Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022; P.S. Mursan District Hathras; service dispute between clerk-appellant and Principal-informant; application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.; respondent no. 2 absent despite notice; time-bound trial direction of 12 months; bar on coercive action during pendency; appeal disposed of, summoning order not quashed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of with directions: the trial court to proceed with trial in Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022 in pursuance of order dated 15.11.2022 and decide it preferably within 12 months; no coercive action against the appellant till pendency of the complaint case. The summoning order itself was not quashed. ¶¶15

Nayan Kamal Agarwal Vs State of Up and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 03.01.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hathras and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) of SC/ST Act (P.S. Mursan, District Hathras) should be set aside.

¶¶8

Court's answer

The Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hathras is directed to proceed with trial in Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022 in pursuance of its order dated 15.11.2022 and decide it preferably within 12 months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of this order, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party but after giving full opportunity of hearing to both sides.

¶¶12

Ratio / Principle

Till the pendency of the above-mentioned complaint case, no coercive action shall be initiated against the appellant.

¶¶14

Key takeaways

Both parties are directed not to seek unnecessary adjournments unless unavoidable and to cooperate with the learned trial court for achieving the directions issued.ratio¶¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) disposed of CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 8560 of 2024 filed by Nayan Kamal Agarwal, a clerk, challenging the summoning order dated 03.01.2024 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hathras in Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022 (Dr. Kailash Chandra Vs. Nayan Kamal Agarwal) under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Mursan, District Hathras, arising from a service dispute between the appellant-clerk and the informant-Principal. Respondent no. 2 did not appear despite notice. The Court did not decide the challenge on merits; it directed the trial court to proceed with trial in pursuance of its order dated 15.11.2022 and decide the complaint preferably within 12 months of presentation of the certified copy, without unnecessary adjournments, and directed that no coercive action be taken against the appellant till pendency of the complaint case.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21079

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8560 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Nayan Kamal Agarwal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Parvez Alam,Raj Narayan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

In pursuance to order dated 25.11.2024, notice has already been served upon respondent no. 2. In spite of service of notice, none appeared on behalf of respondent no. 2 either in person or through counsel and as such, no option left but to consider the prayer as made in the appeal on the basis of documents available on record as well as assistance rendered by learned counsel for the appellant.

¶8

The instant appeal has been preferred for challenging the summoning order dated 03.01.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hathras as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022 (Dr. Kailash Chandra Vs. Nayan Kamal Agarwal) under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Mursan, District Hathras.

¶9

The instant matter pertains to service matter wherein appellant is rendering his services as a 'clerk' and the informant is the 'Principal' of the institution, who misuses the power which has been vest with the Head of the institution which culminated into filing of application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. which was registered as a complaint case, wherein the appellant has been summoned vide order dated 03.01.2024 in pursuance to Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) of SC/ST Act.

¶10

Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant appeal.

¶11

No fruitful purpose shall be served by way of inviting counter and rejoinder affidavit once none took interest to appear on behalf of respondent no. 2.

¶12

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hathras is hereby directed to proceed with trial in pursuance to order dated 15.11.2022 in Complaint Case No. 788 of 2022 (Dr. Kailash Chandra Vs. Nayan Kamal Agarwal) under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Mursan, District Hathras, and decide it preferably within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order before him without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, but after giving full opportunity of hearing to both sides.

¶13

It is also directed to the parties that no unnecessary adjournment shall be sought unless the same is unavoidable and both the parties are directed to cooperate with the learned court concerned for achieving the directions as made above.

¶14

However, it is made clear that till the pendency of the above mentioned complaint case no coercive action shall be initiated against the appellant.

¶15

The instant appeal is hereby disposed of accordingly.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.2.2025 #Vik/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nayan Kamal Agarwal v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nayan Kamal Agarwal v. State of Up 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases