Allahabad High Court
Prabhu Nath vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 February, 2023
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3598 of 2023 Applicant :- Prabhu Nath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Pratap Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
List revised.
Heard Sri Surya Pratap Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Arti Agarwal, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Prabhu Nath with the prayer to quash the order dated 09.10.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No. 7, Allahabad in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1735-A of 2010 (Deenanath Vs. Prabhunath) whereby learned Magistrate has rejected the discharge application filed by the applicant under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. as well as order dated 03.12.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Allahabad in Criminal Revision No. 13 of 2020 (CNR No. UPAD010004502020) (Prabhunath Vs. State of U.P.) and another) dismissing the criminal revision filed by the applicant and affirming the order passed by the trial court and with a further prayer to allow the present application and discharge the applicant from all the charges under Sections 467, 468, 471, 419, 420 IPC levelled against him, by allowing his discharge application as well as further proceedings of the aforesaid case be stayed, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No. 7, Allahabad, during the pendency of the present application.
After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant states that his argument is only that the present proceedings are quite old and as such liberty be granted to file an application before the trial court for expediting the trial as the trial court is not clear as to which protest petition has been proceeded as a complaint and the trial court has in its order dated 13.02.2015 stated of it and the situation is the same till date. It is argued that as such, appropriate direction be issued for disposal of trial in time bound manner.
Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer made in the present matter by arguing that no such specific reasons have been made out for giving any direction for expediting the trial of the case and as such the application be dismissed.
After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that there is no specific reason for expediting the same. However, the applicant may file an application for expediting the trial before the court concerned within two weeks from today which may as per its load of work, diary and pendency of cases, pass appropriate orders on the same within two weeks.
It is made clear that this Court has not passed any direction for expediting the trial.
The present application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 13.2.2023 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)