Allahabad High Court
SMT RATI SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- AJAY KUMAR II
Holding
The High Court refused to issue a time‑bound disposal direction as no exceptional circumstances were established.
Summary
The applicant, Smt Rati Singh, filed an application under Section 529 of the BNSS seeking a High Court direction that the Family Court in Mirzapur decide her pending maintenance case (Case No. 617 of 2025) and an interim maintenance application filed under Section 144 of the BNSS on a time‑bound basis. The State’s Additional Government Advocate did not oppose the request provided the lower court was not overloaded. The Court examined Supreme Court pronouncements in Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain v. State of Maharashtra and High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P., which hold that constitutional courts should only impose time‑bound schedules in truly exceptional circumstances. The applicant failed to demonstrate any such exceptional circumstance. Consequently, the High Court refused the relief sought, but granted the applicant liberty to move an appropriate application before the Family Court for expeditious disposal, which the lower court must decide within six weeks if filed. The application was therefore disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct a lower Family Court to dispose of a pending maintenance case on a time‑bound schedule under Section 529 of the BNSS.
- Whether the circumstances in the present case qualify as ‘exceptional’ to justify such a direction.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 144, 529
Subjects
- time‑bound disposal
- exceptional circumstances
- pendency of cases
- family law
- maintenance
- Section 529 BNSS
- Section 144 BNSS
- High Court direction
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4300 of 2026
Smt Rati Singh
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bal Mukund Singh, Shri Prakash Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE DR. AJAY KUMAR-II, J.
1. Heard 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 Court of Principal Judge, Family Court,
Mirzapur to expeditiously decide the Case No. 617 of 2025 (Rati Singh vs.
Dharmendra Kumar Singh) under section 144 BNSS, 2023, pending before
the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Mirzapur.
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 in this case, an
application under Section 144 BNSS was filed before the learned Court
below, which is still pending and has not been decided till date. Therefore,
he requested that a direction to learned Court below be issued to decide the
aforesaid interim maintenance application as well as aforesaid maintenance
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 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.
NA529 No. 4300 of 2026
2
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 pendency 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
circumstance to issue direction for time-bound/expeditious disposal of case,
at this stage. Accordingly, the 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 above
mentioned case as well as their interim maintenance application. Therefore,
the applicant is given liberty to move appropriate application before Court
concerned for bringing out all such facts, which are necessary for
expeditious disposal of her case, within two weeks from today and in case,
such an application is moved, the Court concerned shall decide the same
within six weeks from the date of filing of such application. If, Court
concerned 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 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. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present application is
disposed of.
September 9, 2026
Monika
(Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MONIKA KESARWANI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…