SMT. VANDANA VISHWAS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
NA529/710/2025 · 2025-04-07
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36835 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36835 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50992 Court No. - 80 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 710 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Vandana Vishwas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Singh 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 Case No.671 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No.47 of 2019 under Sections 498-A, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Chakiya, District- Chandauli pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Chakia, Chandauli 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 applicant is aggrieved wife/ informant of the aforesaid case. The accused persons are applying delaying tactics in disposal of the said case. It is also submitted that twice they move application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court but they were granted no relief or interim protection by this Court. It is also submitted that the accused persons also moved discharge application which was rejected and subsequently when they disappeared before the Court punitive processes were issued against them. It is brought to the notice of this Court that application no. 171 of 2024 has also been moved by the accused persons but no relief or interim protection has been granted to the accused persons and only the pendency of the transfer application, sue moto does not mean that the proceeding has been stayed by this Court.
4. I have considered the submissions and perused the entire record.
5. In the circumstances, the trial court is expected to invoke its power to ensure service of process upon the accused person, which is sent under its seal and order in order to procure the presence of the accused. This Court is also aware of the fact that the Family
Courts in the State of U.P. are overburdened with the cases and are, as such gasping for breath, but however considering the grievance and difficulties faced by the applicant/wife, the Court concerned is
directed to decide the aforesaid case within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it, if there is no legal impediment.
6. It is also made clear that the Court / Presiding Officer is not the only stake holder in the trial and disposal of a case, hence, besides the P.O. concerned, all the stake holders i.e. police and executive authorities, counsels, parties to the case, staff etc. are also made bound by this order and it will be their responsibility also to assist the Court in every manner for the expeditious disposal of this case.
7. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.4.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad