Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52643 (ALL)

RAMNARAYAN v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA529/1378/2025 · 2025-05-19

Nalin Kumar Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:84561 Court No. - 80 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 1378 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramnarayan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Kumar Srivastava,Sunil Prakash Anand Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed on behalf of the applicant to direct the Special Judge N.I. Act, IInd, Allahabad, to decide the compliant Case No.1983 of 2021 (Ramnarayan Vs. Arvind Kumar) Under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station- Dhoomanganj, District- Prayagraj, pending in the court of Special Judge N.I. Act, IInd, Allahabad, within stipulated time period. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The applicant before this Court is the complainant in the aforementioned case and a prayer has been made for the expeditious disposal of the same. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the matter is pending before the Trial Court since the year 2021 but since the opposite party no. 2, the accused, has not appeared before the Trial Court, whereas the summoning order was passed on 05.04.2022. 5. Learned AGA opposed the prayer. 6. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 7. In the aforesaid 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 Trial Courts in the State of U.P. are overburdened with the cases and are, as such gasping for breath. It appears from the perusal of the record that some punitive process has been made against the accused by the Trial Court but still Trial Court should be more vigilant to procure presence of the accused persons, opposite party no. 2, before it, if possible within two months, and after his appearance, all the efforts should be made to finally decide this case within the stipulated period of time as mentioned in the N.I. Act itself. 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 :- 20.5.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad