Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83337 Court No. - 80 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 965 of 2025 Applicant :- Shubhani @ Shubhangi Trehan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak 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 Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No.21, Allahabad to expedite and decide the Case No.59 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.974 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Colnelganj, District Prayagraj. 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 the aggrieved wife/ informant in the aforesaid case. It is further submitted that in the instant case cognizance after submission of the charge-sheet has been taken by the trial court on 31.01.2023, but still the court has been unable to procure the presence of all the accused persons, and the applicant is running to the court unnecessarily and is being harassed. 4. I have considered the submissions and perused the entire record. 5. It reflects from the perusal of the order sheets that the aforesaid case is pending since the year 2020. The accused person has not appeared before the Court so far. 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 and take all possible measures to procure the presence of the accused/ opposite party no.2 by sending appropriate process to him within three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before it. 6. The applicant has made a prayer for expeditious disposal of the aforementioned application in a time bound manner. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a recent judgement dated 29.2.2024 passed in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. and others, (2024) 6 SCC 267 has held as under:- "Constitutional Courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts. Constitutional Courts may issue directions for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the concerned Courts where the cases are pending; and......." 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has not shown any exceptional circumstances to issue direction for time bound disposal of the said case at this stage. However, in view of the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned to make all endeavours for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid case, if there is no legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted. 8. 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. 9. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 19.5.2025 Radhika Digitally signed by :- RADHIKA VISHWAKARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad