Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 195239 (ALL)

PRADEEP KUMAR YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. U.P. LKO.

A483/903/2025 · 2025-10-17

Saurabh Lavania

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 903 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:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar to decide the Criminal Case No. 4800 of 1999; State Vs. Sandeep Kumar and others, arising out of Charge Sheet dated 31.12.1996 in pursuance of First Information Report No. 129 of 1996 Under Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 345, 336, 506, 352, 323, 427 I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act Police Station Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, expeditiously as this Hon'ble Court may deemed fit which is pending before the Court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar since year 1996 (Contained as Annexure No. 1 and 2), in the interest of Justice." Considering the facts as stated, particularly the period of pendency of the case, which appears to be pending since 1996, 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. With the aforesaid, the petition is disposed of. October 17, 2025 Jyoti/- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Ahmad Mehdi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Pradeep Kumar Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench