RAJKUMARversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

              HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                 APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4307 of 2026

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)             :   Amit Kumar Sharma, Mukesh Kumar Pandey
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 State and perused
material on record.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicant with prayer to direct the
learned trial court to decide/expedite the S.T. No. 1261 of 2024 (State vs. Yogendra
Nishad) arising out of Case Crime No. 31 of 2024, under Sections 376(3), 328 IPC
and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, P.S. Bhoganipur, District Kanpur Dehat, pending
before Additional District and Sessions Judge-13, Kanpur Dehat within stipulated
period.
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 matter belongs to the year 2024, which is still
pending and has not been decided till now. 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 fixing a time bound schedule for disposal of any case before any Court
unless the situation is extra ordinary.
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 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
                                                                                                    NA529 No. 4307 of 2026
                                                                        2

                                    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 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, applicant is given a
                                    liberty to move an appropriate application before trial Court concerned for bringing
                                    out all such fact, 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 four weeks from the date of filing of such application. If trial
                                    Court comes to 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. Accordingly, the present application is disposed of with aforesaid direction.
                                    September 9, 2026
                                    Dhirendra/
                                                                                                  (Dr. Ajay Kumar-II,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
DHIRENDRA KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad