Allahabad High Court

PRADEEP YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 7 September 2026
Bench: AJAY KUMAR II

Holding

The High Court held that without proof of exceptional circumstances, no direction for time‑bound disposal can be issued under Section 529 of the BNSS.

Summary

The applicant, an accused in a criminal case (Session Case No. 31201/2020 under Section 380 IPC), filed an application under Section 529 of the BNSS seeking a court order directing the trial court to dispose of the case within a stipulated time. The State’s counsel raised no objection provided the trial court was not overloaded. The High Court referred to Supreme Court precedents emphasizing that time‑bound schedules are to be imposed only in extraordinary circumstances. It found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any such exceptional circumstance. Consequently, the application for a time‑bound direction was refused, but the applicant was granted liberty to move a suitable application before the trial court for expeditious disposal, with the trial court directed to decide any such application within six weeks. The judgment underscores that priority orders are to be left to the concerned courts unless an extraordinary situation exists.

Issues considered

Can the High Court, under Section 529 of the BNSS, direct a trial court to dispose of a pending criminal case within a fixed time‑frame?
Has the applicant shown any exceptional circumstances justifying such a time‑bound direction?
Should the court grant liberty to the applicant to seek expeditious disposal through a separate application before the trial court?

Legislation cited

BNSS — s. 529
Indian Penal Code — s. 380

Subjects

time‑bound disposal
Section 529 application
exceptional circumstances
criminal trial
expeditious disposal
court pendency

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 3937 of 2026

Pradeep Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brijesh Kumar Yadav, Sabhajeet
Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A.

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

1. Heard Mr. Brijesh Kumar Yadav, 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 trial Court to conclude the
trial proceedings in stipulated time frame of Session Case No.
31201/2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 222/2020, under Section
380 IPC, P.S. G.R.P. Central, District Kanpur Nagar, which is
pending before Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), Court No.5, Kanpur
Nagar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant
that he is an accused in the aforesaid case, which case 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 a 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
NA529 No. 3937 of 2026
2

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, 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. 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.

9. Considering the nature of prayer made by learned counsel for the
applicant, the interest of justice would be served, in the event, the
applicant applies before the Court concerned for expeditious disposal
of the above mentioned case. Therefore, the applicant is given a
liberty to move an appropriate application before trial Court
concerned for bringing out all such facts, which are necessary for
expeditious disposal of his case within two weeks from today and in
case, such an application is moved, the trial Court shall decide the
same within six weeks from the date of filing of such application. If,
the trial Court 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. It is also provided that in the event there is any legal impediment
NA529 No. 3937 of 2026
3

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.

11. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of with aforesaid
observation/direction.

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…