HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39733 of 2026 Court No. - 79 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA. 2. Present application has been preferred with the prayer to quash cognizance/summoning order dated 28.05.2014 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad over chargesheet dated 30.03.2014 submitted in Case No.19571 of 2014 (State Vs. Ajay Kumar), arising out of Case Crime no. 399 of 2014, under Section 354(D) IPC, P.S.- Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Ghaziabad. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that he is challenging the impugned order on the sole ground that present case is pending for last about 12 years although FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 2014 and charge-sheet was submitted in the year 2014 and cognizance was also taken in the year 2014 and thereafter charges were framed on dated 14.01.2019. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused as well as of complainant guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and for last about 12 years, applicant is facing agony of criminal trial without any fault and proceeding of the present matter is pending for last about 12 years. Learned counsel for applicant next submitted that according to Article 21 of the Constitution of India, no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law and such procedure should be reasonable, fair and just and inordinate delay of 12 years in completion of trial cannot be said to be reasonable, fair and just. Learned counsel for applicant further contended that right of speedy trial is, therefore, a fundamental right which has been infringed in the present case. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adwait Prakash Ojha, Ashutosh Mani Tiwari, Manish Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ajay Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 4. By bare perusal of the entire material available on record alongwith ordersheet, it is evident that after Pandemic, there are continuous applications for seeking exemption from personal appearance preferred at the behest of applicant and the same have also been allowed from 27.06.2022 to till date, meaning thereby, applicant himself is avoiding his presence before learned trial court concerned and as such, the argument raised by learned counsel for applicant is hereby rejected. 5. Applicant is hereby directed to cooperate with trial and at the same time, learned trial court concerned is directed not to accept the exemption application except preferred on specific ground mentioning unavoidable circumstance. This Court also notes that the present matter pertains under the category of pending cases from more than ten years, the trial of the same may be expedited as expeditiously as possible. 6. With the above observations, the instant application is disposed of. September 18, 2026 Vivek Kr. NA528 No. 39733 of 2026 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad