Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35301 (ALL)

MOHD BILAL v. STATE OF U.P THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME) AND ANOTHER

NA529/640/2025 · 2025-04-01

Nalin Kumar Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:45725 Court No. - 80 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 640 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd Bilal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Its Principal Secretary (Home) And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhijat Awasthi,Abu Bakht Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to direct the court concerned to decide the Complaint Case No. 81 of 2024, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station- Didauli, District- Amroha pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrtae 1st, Amroha (J.P. Nagar) expeditiously within a stipulated period. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the aforesaid case is pending since 2024 and summoning order was passed by the trial court but till date the accused has not appeared before the trial court despite passing of the said summoning order and the Court concerned is not taking any interest for compliance of its own order to ensure the appearance of the accused before it. 4. I have considered the submissions and perused the entire record. 5. It appears from the perusal of the record that above complaint case is pending at the stage of recording of evidence. The applicant before this Court himself is the complainant and he has to adduce all the evidence in his favor before the Court at his personal level as it is a private complaint case, hence, the applicant before this Court himself directed to adduce his evidence whatsoever, before the trial Court. 6. Needless to say that evidence may be adduced by the applicant / complainant himself but it is very strange that instead of adducing evidence, the applicant / complainant unnecessarily knocked the door of this Court, which is not a good practice. No direction is required to be issued to the Court concerned for expeditious disposal of the case but however, if the applicant / complainant wants expeditious disposal of the case, he is free to adduce the complete evidence before the Court and if the evidence is adduced by the applicant/ complainant, the trial Court shall record this without unnecessarily delay. 7. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 2.4.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad