Pushpa Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Pushpa Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Trial court directed to invoke its powers under law to ensure the presence of the remaining three accused persons within three months, and thereafter to decide Case No. 1636 of 2017 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one year of production of certified copy of this order before it, without unnecessary adjournments, keeping in view the heavy workload and provided there is no legal impediment; all stake holders (police and execution authorities, advocates, parties, staff) bound to assist the Court for expeditious disposal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned trial court should be directed to decide pending Case No. 1636 of 2017 (State Vs. Murari Lal and others) expeditiously within a stipulated period, as prayed for by the informant-applicant. +1 more

Court's answer

The learned trial court is directed to invoke the powers given to it under law to ensure the presence of the remaining three accused persons within three months, and in case they appear, to make all endeavours to decide the case as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either party and keeping in view the heavy workload in the said court, if there is no legal impediment.

Ratio / Principle

Criminal courts are not toothless or powerless to ensure compliance of their own orders by the concerned police and administrative authorities; they have ample powers for this in the law itself, including power to ensure service of process upon accused persons, which the trial court is expected to invoke.

Key takeaways

Besides the Presiding Officer, all stake holders in the trial and disposal of the case — police and execution authorities, advocates, parties to the case and staff — are made bound by this order and it is their responsibility to assist the Court in every manner for expeditious disposal of the case.ratio¶¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Court No. 83 (Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J.), Order dated 18.7.2025 [Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:117383]: Application U/S 529 BNSS No. 1716 of 2025 filed by Pushpa Verma (counsel Rama Shankar Upadhyay), opposite parties State Of U.P. And 3 Others (G.A.), praying for expeditious disposal of the pending trial Case No. 1636 of 2017 (State Vs. Murari Lal and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 5044 of 2008, under Sections 147, 406, 420, 494, 120-B, 498A, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Lalitpur, before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Fast Track Court, Lalitpur; the applicant is the informant and the matter has been pending since 2017. Per a Court-commissioned report dated 15.07.2025 of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lalitpur (submitted pursuant to this Court's order dated 08.07.2025): an earlier High Court order dated 20.01.2025 (Application U/S 483 Cr.P.C. No. 2497 of 2024) had already directed framing of charges within two months and expeditious disposal; out of eight accused, trial of four was separated and charges framed, the case against one accused was abated, and non-bailable warrants remained outstanding against three accused who are not appearing, leaving the trial pending at the stage of appearance. The Court reminds that criminal courts are never toothless or powerless to ensure compliance of their own orders by police and administrative authorities and have ample powers in the law itself, including to ensure service of process upon accused persons. Directive: the trial court is to invoke its powers to secure the presence of the remaining three accused within three months, and on their appearance to decide the case as expeditiously as possible, preferably within one year of production of the certified copy of this order, without unnecessary adjournments, keeping in view the court's heavy workload and subject to there being no legal impediment; besides the Presiding Officer, all stake holders — police and execution authorities, advocates, parties and staff — are bound by the order to assist in every manner. Disposition: application disposed of.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117383

Court No. - 83

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 1716 of 2025

Applicant :- Pushpa Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Shankar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

This application under Section 529 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as B.N.S.S.) has been filed with a prayer to direct the learned trial court to decide Case No. 1636 of 2017 (State Vs. Murari Lal and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 5044 of 2008, under Sections 147, 406, 420, 494, 120-B, 498A, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Lalitpur, pending before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Fast Track Court, Lalitpur, expeditiously within a stipulated period.

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

In pursuance of the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by this Court, a report dated 15.07.2025 has been submitted by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Lalitpur wherein it has been mentioned that earlier an order dated 20.01.2025 was passed by Hon'ble High Court in Application U/S 483 Cr.P.C. No. 2497 of 2024 and a direction was given for framing of charge against the accused persons within two months and then dispose of the said case expeditiously. It is also mentioned in the said report that out of eight accused persons, trial of four accused persons was separated and charges were framed against them. Case against one of the accused person was abated and against rest of the three accused persons non-bailable warrants have been issued and the trial court is making all endeaviours to decide the case expeditiously. The report aforesaid reveals that three accused persons are not appearing in the court and the case is pending at the stage of appearance of the accused persons.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the informant in this case and the matter is pending since the year 2017 which requires expeditious disposal of the case.

5. Learned AGA opposed the prayer.

I have considered the submissions and perused the record. It is reminded that the criminal courts are never toothless or powerless to ensure compliance of its own orders by the concerned police and administrative authorities. They have got ample powers for the same in the law itself. The trial court is expected to invoke its power to ensure service of process upon the accused persons, which is sent under its seal and order in order to procure the presence of the accused.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned trial court is directed to invoke the powers given to it under law to ensure the presence of remaining three accused persons within three months from today and in case they appear before the court, the trial court shall make all the endeavours to decide the case as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties and keeping in view the heavy workload in the said court, if there is no legal impediment.

It is also made clear that the Court/Presiding Officer is not the 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 execution authorities, advocates, 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.

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Rmk.

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad