HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 3791 of 2026 Court No. - 78 HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J. 1. Heard Km. Sakshi Patel, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 529 of BNSS has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to direct Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-1 Jaunpur to decide the Case No. 991 of 2022 (Seema and others vs. Ravishankar) under Section 128 Cr.P.C., which is pending before Additional Principal Judge, Family Court-1, Jaunpur, within stipulated period fixed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the proceedings before the Court concerned be directed to be concluded in a time-bound manner. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that proceedings of the aforesaid case under Section 128 Cr.P.C. filed before the learned Court below, is still pending and has not been decided till date. She requested that a direction to the learned Court below be issued to decide the aforesaid case within a stipulated period. 4. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in this regard if the Court below is not already overloaded with huge pendency of such cases. 5. Hon'ble Apex Court in Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain vs. State of Maharashtra in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 587 of 2023 has observed that every High Court and every Court in the country has a huge pendency, the constitutional Court should avoid temptation of fixing a time bound schedule for disposal of any case before any Court unless the situation is extraordinary. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Km. Sakshi Patel Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Seema And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Hon'ble Apex Court in High Court Bar Association, Allahabad vs. State of U.P. and others, (2024) 6 SCC 267 has observed in paragraph 42, which is reproduced as under:- "Constitutional Courts should not normally fix a time-bound schedule for disposal of cases pending in any Court. The pattern of pendency of various categories of cases pending in every Court, including High Courts, is different. The situation at the grassroots level is better known to the judges of the concerned Courts. Therefore, the issue of giving out-of-turn priority to certain cases should be best left to the concerned Courts. The orders fixing the outer limit for the disposal of cases should be passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations." 7. Thus, law as far as issuance of a direction for time-bound/expeditious disposal has already been well settled that only when an exceptional circumstance is made out, a direction for time-bound/expeditious disposal of such a case can be issued not otherwise. 8. Learned counsel for the applicants has failed to make out any exceptional circumstance to issue direction for time-bound/expeditious disposal of case, at this stage. Accordingly, the relief sought by way of present application is hereby refused. 9. Considering the nature of prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, the interest of justice would be served, in the event, the applicants apply before the Court concerned for expeditious disposal of above mentioned case. Therefore, the applicants are given liberty to move appropriate application(s) before Court concerned for bringing out all such facts, which are necessary for expeditious disposal of their case, within two weeks from today and in case, such an application is moved, the Court concerned shall decide the same within two weeks from the date of filing of such application. If, Court concerned comes to the conclusion that the case for expeditious disposal is made out, then in that eventuality, it shall decide the same as expeditiously as possible within a reasonable period. 10. From the perusal of the record, it reveals that the aforesaid case was filed on 30.05.2022 and by the order dated 22.12.2022, service upon the opposite party no. 2 is found to be sufficient and thereafter the learned Court concerned issued a recovery warrant against the opposite party no. 2. Considering the fact that the applicant no. 1 is the wife of the opposite party no. 2 the applicant nos. 2 and 3 are the minor son and daughter of opposite party no.2, it is expected from the learned Court concerned to take all NA529 No. 3791 of 2026 2 necessary steps for realization of recovery warrant and if necessary, the issue of non realization of recovery warrant be also taken up in the monthly meeting, which is regularly conducted by Principal Judge, Family Court with District Magistrate and SP/SSP of concerned district. 1. It is also provided that in the event there is any legal impediment before the Court concerned in disposal of the case, then the Court concerned shall pass an appropriate order disclosing the legal impediment as to why the proceedings of the above mentioned case cannot be proceeded with. 12. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present application is disposed of. September 8, 2026 Monika NA529 No. 3791 of 2026 3 (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.) Digitally signed by :- MONIKA KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad