Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 104462 (ALL)

SANJAY YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A483/1824/2024 · 2025-01-19

Nand Prabha Shukla

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13298 Court No. - 82 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 1824 of 2024 Applicant :- Sanjay Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under section 483 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicant seeking direction for expeditious disposal of Case No. 557 of 2021 (Sanjay Vs. Shlok) under Section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station Singramau, District Jaunpur pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Court No. 15, Jaunpur. 3. A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 that the relief which is sought for in the present application has already been granted to the applicant by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/s. 482 No. 25563 of 2023 vide order dated 18.07.2023 and in view of that now he is not entitled to pray for the same relief again before this Court in another forum. 4. The said plea has been vehemently contended by the learned counsel for the applicant. It is submitted that the Application U/s. 482 No. 25563 of 2023 was moved by the applicant before this Court seeking relief for the expeditious disposal of the case referred above. It is further submitted that in the said proceeding it was ordered on 18.07.2023 by the coordinate Bench of this Court like this:- "4. In view of the provision of Section 143 (3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Court No. 14, Jaunpur is expected to make all endeavours to decide the aforesaid case expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of certified copy of this order after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties without giving any unnecessary adjournments to either parties and there is no other legal impediment in deciding the aforesaid case. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of." 5. It is further submitted that the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and 483 Cr.P.C. are quite different. The applicant has a legal right to approach this Court under Section 483 Cr.P.C. for the sake of invoking its power to exercise its superintendence over the courts of judicial Magistrate subordinate to it as to ensure that there is an expeditious and proper disposal of cases by such Magistrates. It is further submitted that in view of that the applicant has moved the present application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction from this Court to the learned trial court for expeditious disposal of the case mentioned herein above. 6. A perusal of order dated 18.07.2023 passed by this Court which is appended shows that the said application was moved seeking a direction for the trial court for the expeditious disposal of the case referred above. It further reveals from the perusal of the aforesaid order that said relief was granted as well in favour of the applicant by this Court and a direction was issued to the trial court for the expeditious disposal of the case referred above preferably within a period of six months. Now the present application has been filed seeking the same relief. This Court is of the view that if the order dated 18.07.2023 passed by this Court was not complied with the applicant may take further action in accordance with law but for the same relief he may not be permitted to start another proceeding before this Court, because the present application for the same cause of action is not maintainable as the principle of resjudicata is affected. 7. In view of the same, I find force in the contention made by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and the present application in the light of the aforesaid observation being not maintainable is hereby by rejected. Order Date :- 20.1.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad