Allahabad High Court

SMT RAKHI SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: AJAY KUMAR II

Holding

In the absence of exceptional circumstances, the court cannot issue a direction for time‑bound disposal of the pending criminal case.

Summary

Smt Rakhi Singh filed an application under Section 529 of the BNSS requesting that the Principal Judge of the Family Court, Banda, decide a pending criminal case (Criminal Misc. Case No. 111/XI of 2026) under Section 144(3) BNSS within a stipulated period. The State’s A.G.A. raised no objection provided the trial court was not already overloaded. The High Court examined Supreme Court precedents that constitutional courts should not normally impose time‑bound schedules unless extraordinary circumstances exist, citing Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain v. State of Maharashtra and High Court Bar Association v. State of U.P. The record showed the trial court had promptly issued recovery warrants, indicating no undue delay. The applicant failed to demonstrate any exceptional circumstance justifying a time‑bound order, and the application for such a direction was therefore refused and dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can direct a trial court to decide a criminal case within a stipulated period under Section 144(3) BNSS.
Whether exceptional circumstances exist that warrant a time‑bound disposal order.
Whether the general pendency of courts precludes the issuance of a time‑bound schedule.

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 144(3), 529

Subjects

time‑bound disposal
exceptional circumstances
court pendency
Section 529 BNSS
Section 144(3) BNSS
criminal procedure
High Court direction

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 3790 of 2026

Smt Rakhi Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Harsh Narayan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 78
HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J.

1. Heard Mr. Harsh Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant,
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
applicant with a prayer to direct the Principal Judge, Family Court, Banda to
decide the Criminal Misc. Case No. 111/XI of 2026 (Smt. Rakhi Singh vs.
Sunil Kumar) under Section 144 (3) BNSS, Police Station Kotwali Nagar,
District Banda, pending before him within stipulated period as fixed by this
Court.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case, an
application under Section 144 (3) BNSS was filed before the learned trial
Court, which is still pending and has not been decided till date, therefore, he
requested that a direction to learned trial Court be issued to decide the
aforesaid case within stipulated period of time.

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.

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,
NA529 No. 3790 of 2026
2

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 pendecny 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. From the perusal of the records reveals that aforesaid criminal case was
filed on 17.03.2026 and on the very first date, recovery warrant against the
opposite party no. 2 was issued by the learned trial Court. Thereafter, even
on 19.06.2026, recovery warrant was again ordered to be issued by the
learned trial Court, therefore, there seems to be no delay in conducting the
present criminal case by the trial Court.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant has failed to make out any exceptional
circumstances to issue direction for time-bound/expeditious disposal of case,
at this stage. Accordingly, relief sought by way of present application is
hereby refused.

10. In view of the above, the present application is dismissed.

September 8, 2026
Monika
(Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
MONIKA KESARWANI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…