Allahabad High Court
Maya Ram vs Smt. Sudha Yadav Chief Judicial ... on 6 April, 2026
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:24030
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1278 of 2026
Maya Ram
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
Smt. Sudha Yadav Chief Judicial Magistrate Ambedkar Nagar
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Vikas Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
Court No. - 7
HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.
1. Heard Shri Vikas Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel for the State/opposite party and perused the record.
2. The instant application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (in short "Act of 1971") has been filed in relation to the order dated 25.01.2021, passed in application under Section 482/378/407 No.289 of 2021 (Vimla Devi Vs. State of U.P. & others) which is extracted herein under :-
"The present petition under Section 483 Cr.P.C. has been filed with limited prayer for a direction to Court concerned to decide the trial of Criminal Case No.2228 of 2015, State Vs. Kamla Devi and others, arising out of Case Crime No.40 of 2013, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar. within a stipulated period.
In view of the aforesaid, learned Trial Court is directed to decide the said trial expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it.
With the aforesaid observation/direction the petition is disposed of."
3. As the trial court could not concluded the trial within the period prescribed by this Court i.e. 01 year, the petitioner-Vimla Devi approached this Court by means of the Contempt Application (Civil) No.834 of 2022 (Vimla Devi Vs. Smt. Poonam Singh, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar) and this application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 27.04.2022, which is extracted herein under :-
"Heard Sri Vikas Verma, learned counsel for applicant.
2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that by means of order of the writ court dated 25.01.2021 passed in Misc. Case No. 289 of 2021 (Under Section 483 Cr.P.C.) , this Court had directed the trial court to decide the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of one year form the date a certified copy of that order is produced before it.
4. According to the order-sheet annexed by the applicant, the case was listed on 01.02.2021, 11.02.2021, 23.02.2021 and lastly on 06.03.2021.
5. It is noticed that on 23.02.2021, bailable warrants has been issued to secure appearance of the accused but it seems that he did not appear before the trial court.
6. Considering the order-sheet, it cannot be said that efforts are not being made to conclude the trial and needless to say that in absence of the accused the trial cannot proceed. the trial court has also issued bailable warrants to secure the appearance. It is also noticed that the case was listed on 06.03.2021 but on the said date, the lawyers were abstaining from work and again on that date due to non-appearance of the accused orders were passed to secure his appearance.
7. In light of the above, it cannot be said that respondents are willfully and deliberately disobeyed the order of the writ court.
8. In light of the observations made above, the contempt petition is dismissed.
9. Despite dismissal of the contempt petition, the court below is under an obligation to decide the case expeditiously without giving unnecessary adjournments."
4. The trial has not been concluded till date and therefore the present contempt application has been filed by one Maya Ram husband of Vimla Devi, who earlier approached this Court.
5. It is to be noted that the pending Criminal Case i.e. 2228 of 2015 (State Vs. Kamla Devi) relates to Case Crime No.40/2013, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station - Kotwali Akbarpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar.
6. Considering the sections aforesaid, to a query put to Shri Vikas Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether any civil suit has been filed till date, he has failed to reply the said query.
7. Upon due consideration of the aforesaid facts, this Court finds that the present contempt application has no force and the same is liable to be dismissed. It is for the following reasons :-
(i) Earlier contempt application filed in connection to the order in issue dated 25.01.2021, i.e. Contempt Application (Civil) No.834 /2022 was dismissed by this Court.
(ii) No document to establish the fact that it is a case of "willful disobedience" has been filed before this Court by the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, the instant contempt application is dismissed. Cost made easy.
(Saurabh Lavania,J.) April 6, 2026 ML/-