NEETU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
/2172/2025 · 2025-12-16
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185877 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185877 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 2172 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to opposite party nos.2 and 3 is dispensed with. 2. The present application has been filed with the following main relief:
"I. Therefore it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to set-aside the ex-parte order dated 16.10.2025, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, in Criminal Misc. Case No.3200 of 2025, "Neetu Rawat Vs. Sunita & Another", and the order dated 13.11.2025 passed on recall application filed by the petitioner without application of mind in a mechanical manner and to Restore the original application filed under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. to its original number and decide the same on merits in the ends of justice."
3. It is the case of the applicant that on 16.10.2025, the applicant could not appear before the court below and the case was dismissed in default on the said date. Thereafter, she moved an application for recall of the said order and the reason has been stated in the application that on the date fixed, her son was suffering from serious illness, that is why she could not come to the court to press the case, but the recall application was also rejected on
13.11.2025. 4. After going through the record, I find that on 16.10.2025, the case was Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Neetu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
dismissed for non prosecution and thereafter the recall application was also rejected, though the ground was taken that the son of the applicant was suffering from serious illness, that is why she could not attend the case. The ground taken by the applicant, therefore, appears to be reasonable. 5. In view thereof, the application is allowed and both the orders dated 16.10.2025 and 13.11.2025 are set aside. The application under Section 173(4) of BNSS, 2023 will be decided by the court below within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The applicant will not seek any adjournment.
In case the applicant seeks adjournment, the benefit of this order will not be available to her and the court below will pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. December 16, 2025 Sachin NA528 No. 2172 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench