Anjana Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2026A483/344/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench); Application U/S 483 No. 344 of 2026; Anjana Yadav and others v. State of U.P.; expeditious disposal direction; Case No.99 of 2024; Section 128 Cr.P.C.; maintenance-type proceeding pending since 18.04.2024; direction to decide without unnecessary adjournments; application disposed of; single judge Brij Raj Singh, J.; counsel Ram Singh for applicants, G.A. for State.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the court concerned to decide Case No.99 of 2024 expeditiously in accordance with law without giving any unnecessary adjournment. ¶¶14

Anjana Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 344 of 2026

¶3

Anjana Yadav And 2 Others

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

¶7

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 15

¶9

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State-opposite party.

¶11

The applicant has approached this Court for getting a direction issued to the court concerned to decide Case No.99 of 2024, Anjana Yadav and others Vs. Subhash Yadav, filed under Section 128 Cr.P.C. within a time frame

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that case is pending since 18.04.2024 and there is no substantial progress in the case. He, therefore, prays that a direction be issued to the court concerned to decide the case expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid facts, the court concerned is directed to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously in accordance with law without giving any unnecessary adjournment.

¶14

Application stands disposed of.

¶15

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶16

April 23, 2026

¶17

Rao/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anjana Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anjana Yadav and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko. 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

Rajan Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Sarita Mishra @ Sarita Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Rohit Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. and Another

Vinod Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Smt. Satyabhama Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another