Ashok Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ashok Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Request for transfer of the trial declined; direction issued to the competent court to proceed with the trial of S.T. No.198 of 2024 expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties.

Issue for consideration

Whether the trial of S.T. No.198 of 2024 pending before A.D.J., POCSO II, Faizabad should be transferred to the competent court of any other District. +1 more

Court's answer

Since F.I.R.s were lodged from both sides against each other, charge sheets were submitted and cognizance taken in respect of both, and the applicants are not seeking transfer of the case instituted by the opposite party No.4, the applicants have no apprehension of justice being denied because of any influence exercised by the opposite party No.4; in these circumstances, no case for transfer of the trial from District Ayodhya to any other court outside the District is made out.

Ratio / Principle

The grievance of the applicants regarding delay in proceedings of the trial appears to be genuine, as expeditious disposal of trial is a fundamental right of any accused person.

Key takeaways

While declining the request for transfer of the trial of S.T. No.198 of 2024, and in exercise of its inherent powers, this Court issued a direction to the competent court to proceed with the aforesaid trial expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties.ratio¶¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer Application (Criminal) No. 127 of 2024 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:46172) — Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.; decided 7.8.2025). Applicants Ashok Kumar and another sought transfer of S.T. No.198 of 2024 (Sections 147, 148, 308, 323, 325, 452, 504 & 506 I.P.C., P.S. Tarun, District Ayodhya) pending before A.D.J., POCSO II, Faizabad, alleging that opposite party No.4, an Advocate practising in District Ayodhya, was influencing the trial court, which was adjourning the case repeatedly. Cross F.I.R.s had been lodged from both sides (including F.I.R. No.148 of 2022 by opposite party No.4 against ten persons including the applicants), charge sheets were submitted and cognizance taken in both, and the applicants were not seeking transfer of the cross-case instituted by opposite party No.4. Holding that this showed the applicants had no apprehension of justice being denied due to any influence of opposite party No.4, the Court found no case for transfer of the trial outside District Ayodhya. Accepting that the grievance regarding delay appeared genuine — expeditious disposal of trial being, in the judgment's words, a fundamental right of any accused person — the Court, while declining the transfer request, issued a direction in exercise of its inherent powers to the competent court to proceed with the trial expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties. Transfer application disposed of accordingly.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46172

Court No. - 13

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 127 of 2024

Applicant :- Ashok Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 7 Others

Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vaibhav Srivastava

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

Heard Shri Vipin Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Mohd. Asif Khan, learned A.G.A.-I for the State, Shri Vaibhav Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 to 8 and perused the records.

The instant transfer application has been filed by the applicants seeking transfer of S.T. No.198 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 308, 323, 325, 452, 504 & 506 I.P.C., P.S. Tarun, District Ayodhya, pending before A.D.J., POCSO II, Faizabad to the competent court of any other District.

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the opposite party No.4 is an Advocate practising in District Ayodhya and because of his influence, the trial court is not proceeding with the case and case is being adjourned repeatedly.

The aforesaid case instituted on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the applicants on 14.06.2022. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge sheet on 08.07.2022 and the trial court took cognizance of the offences on 29.10.2022.

Learned counsel for the private opposite parties has

submitted while opposing the application that no undue delay is being caused by the accused persons and charges could not be framed because discharge application filed by some accused persons is pending for disposal before the trial court. He has further submitted that an F.I.R. No.148 of 2022 has been lodged by the opposite party No.4 against ten persons including the applicants and after investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge sheet in respect of the aforesaid case on 02.07.2022 and the trial court took cognizance for the offences on 01.12.2022. He has submitted that the applicants are causing delay in that case.

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicants stating that charges have been framed in respect of F.I.R. No.148 of 2022 on 13.02.2025.

It appears that the F.I.R.s have been lodged from both the sides against each other, charge sheets have been submitted in respect of both the F.I.R.s and cognizance of offences made out in both the charge sheets have been taken by the trial courts on their behalf. The applicants are not seeking transfer of their case instituted by the opposite party No.4 which shows that the applicants have no apprehension of justice being denied to them because of any influence exercised by the opposite party No.4. In these circumstances, no case for transfer of the trial from District Ayodhya to any other court outside the District is made out.

So far as the grievance of the applicants regarding delay in proceedings of the trial is considered, the same appears to be genuine as expeditious disposal of trial is a fundamental right of any accused person.

Accordingly, while declining the request for transfer of the

trial of S.T. No.198 of 2024 from Ayodhay to any other State, in exercise of its inherent powers, this Court issues a direction to the competent court to proceed with the aforesaid trial expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments to any of the parties.

The transfer application is disposed of accordingly.

Order Date :- 7.8.2025 S. Shivhare

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench