SHYAMLAL YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
/82/2025 · 2025-11-28
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185219 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185219 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 82 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. Heard. In view of order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to the private- respondent(s) is hereby dispensed with. The present application has been filed for the following main relief:-
"a. issue suitable direction to the Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate Shravasti to decide and conclude the proceeding of Crl. case No. 7183/2024, State Vs Pavan Rai, arises out of Case Crime No. 165/2024, U/s - 319(2), 318(4), 317(2), 338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS, 419, 420 ,411,467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Hardatt Nagar Girant, District Shravasti within specific time frame, as Court may deem fit just and proper, by resorting the provision of Section 309 Cr.P.C. and other provisions by proceeding with the case on day to day basis." Considering the facts as stated, particularly the period of pendency of the case, which appears to be pending since 2024, this petition is disposed of with direction to authority concerned/court, to consider and decide the pending case in issue, as indicated in the prayer clause, quoted above, most expeditiously as according to various pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court including the judgment(s) passed in the case of Maneka Gandhi Versus Union of India and Another (1978) 1 SCC 248, Hussainara Khatoon Versus Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980) 1 SCC 81, Kadra Pahadiya and Others Versus State of Bihar (1981) 3 SCC 671, the right to speedy trial/disposal of case is implicit under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is made clear that the Court has not examined the case of either party on merits and the Authority concerned shall be free to decide the matter strictly in accordance with law.
November 28, 2025 Jyoti/- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rama Shankar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.)
Shyamlal Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench