Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60732 (ALL)

GOVIND v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA529/1589/2025 · 2025-05-21

Nalin Kumar Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87643 Court No. - 80 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 1589 of 2025 Applicant :- Govind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajat Kumar Shukla 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 conclude / decide the S.S.T. No.22 of 2022 (State Vs. Arjun and others) arising out of case crime no.328 of 2021 under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506, 307 IPC and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station Achhnera, District Agra pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Agra, expeditiously within a period of six months. 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 before this Court is the accused in the aforesaid case. The case is pending at the stage of evidence and the matter pertains to the year 2022. It is further submitted that from the perusal of the order-sheet of the trial court it appears that only two witnesses have been examined so far and thereafter only dates are being fixed for evidence. The matter is unnecessarily pending and no effective proceedings are going on. Prayer has been made for expeditious disposal of the case within a specific time frame. 4. I have considered the submissions and perused the entire record. 5. The applicant has made a prayer for expeditious disposal of the aforementioned case 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" 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has not shown any exceptional circumstances to issue direction for time bound disposal of the present case at this stage. 7. In the circumstances, the learned trial court is directed to make sincere efforts to ensure the presence of witnesses before it and thereafter all possible endeavours shall be made by the trial court to dispose of the case under reference as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, keeping in view the work load in the said Court, if there is no other legal impediment. 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 :- 22.5.2025 ss Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad