Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 61536 (ALL)

SMT. SANGITA YADAV AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA529/2078/2025 · 2025-07-15

Nalin Kumar Srivastava

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115113 Court No. - 83 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 2078 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Sangita Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogendra Gupta 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 trial in Case No. 138 of 2021, under Section 125 CrPC, pending in the Court of learned Family Court, Banda expeditiously within the 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 applicants that applicant no. 1 before this Court is the aggrieved wife in the proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that no maintenance has been awarded to the applicant so far in this matter and application for grant of interim maintenance was moved by the applicant, which is still pending and has not been decided so far, as a result of which the applicant is in the condition of starvation for want of money. 4. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 5. There is a provision in Section 125 Cr.P.C. itself that the interim maintenance application should be decided within a period of two months. 6. In the circumstances, the Court concerned is expected and directed to keep in mind the aforesaid provision and to proceed to decide the aforesaid application for interim maintenance in accordance with law within the stipulated period of time mandated in the relevant law itself, and thereafter all endeavours shall be made by it for expeditious disposal of the case, if there is no legal impediment. It is further directed that no unnecessary adjournment will be sought/granted. 7. It is also made clear that the Court / Presiding Officer is not the only stake holder of the trial and disposal of a case, hence, besides the P.O. concerned, all the stake holders i.e. police and execution authorities, advocates, 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. 8. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad