Disposed¶16

Smt. Manju Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2025NA528/9061/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious trial direction — Allahabad High Court disposes of application u/s 528 BNSS / Section 482 CrPC by Smt. Manju Devi (NA528 No. 9061 of 2025, decided 09-09-2025, Avnish Saxena, J.) seeking early completion of Special Session Trial No.297 of 2020 (State Vs. Mohammad Salim), Case Crime No.0794 of 2020, Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, P.S. Handia, District Prayagraj; trial court directed to conclude trial within six months of certified copy and report thereafter; no trial in haste but honest effort for speedy trial.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to expedite and conclude Special Session Trial No.297 of 2020 within six months from the production of a certified copy of the order and to submit the requisite report after expiry of that period. ¶16

Smt. Manju Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should direct the Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Allahabad to decide Special Session Trial No.297 of 2020 (arising out of Case Crime No.0794 of 2020, Police Station Handia, District Prayagraj) within a stipulated period.

¶8

Court's answer

The trial court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude it within a period of six months from the production of a certified copy of the order, and to submit the requisite report after expiry of that period.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The direction for expedition does not require a trial in haste, but an honest effort for speedy trial.

¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Avnish Saxena, J.; order dated September 9, 2025) disposed of APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9061 of 2025 filed by Smt. Manju Devi, who had invoked the inherent power of the Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking a direction to the Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Allahabad to decide Special Session Trial No.297 of 2020 (State Vs. Mohammad Salim), arising out of Case Crime No.0794 of 2020 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2) (v) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Handia, District Prayagraj, within a stipulated period. By order dated 8.5.2025 the Court had called for a report from the Presiding Officer explaining why the trial of accused opposite party 2 was not completed within one year; the report dated 21.6.2025 revealed that the statement of the formal witness was left to be recorded. Directing expedition, the Court required the trial to be concluded within six months from production of a certified copy of the order with a requisite report thereafter, observing that the order does not require a trial in haste, but an honest effort for speedy trial.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9061 of 2025

¶3

Smt. Manju Devi

¶4

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mukul Yadav, Rajesh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 79

¶6

HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Mukul Yadav, learned counsel, for applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The present applicant has invoked the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 CrPC for directing the Additional District & Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Allahabad to decide the Special Session Trial No.297 of 2020 (State Vs. Mohammad Salim) arising out of Case Crime No.0794 of 2020 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2) (v) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Handia, District Prayagraj within stipulated period.

¶9

This Court vide order dated 8.5.2025 passed the following order:-

¶10

"Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is desirable to have a report from the Presiding Officer of the Court concerned explaining the circumstances on account of which, the trial of accused opposite party 2 could not be completed within a period of 1 year as noted above. The requisite report shall be submitted before this Court within three weeks."

¶11

The report dated 21.6.2025 of the trial court reveals that the statement of formal witness is left to be recorded.

¶12

The trial court may expedite the trial and conclude the same within a

¶13

NA528 No. 9061 of 2025

¶14

¶15

period of six months from the production of certified copy of this order and submit requisite report after expiry. This order does not require a trial in haste, but an honest effort for speedy trial.

¶16

With the aforesaid direction, the present application is disposed of .

¶17

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

¶18

September 9, 2025

¶19

Md Faisal

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Manju Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Manju Devi 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases