DEEPIKA SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

           APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4522 of 2026

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                      :    Sharique Ahmed
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                 :    G.A.

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

1. Heard Mr. Sharique Ahmed, 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 Additional Principal Judge, Family
Court, Court No. 3, Kanpur Nagar to decide the Case No. 564 of 2024
(Deepika Singh vs. Ashutosh SIngh @ Vishal), arising out of proceeding
under Section 125 Cr.P.C. within the stipulated period fixed by this Court.

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 applicants that in this case, an
application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed before the learned Court
below on 12.03.2024, 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 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.
State of U.P. and others, (2024) 6 SCC 267 has observed in paragraph 42,
                                                               NA529 No. 4522 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 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
applicants, the interest of justice would be served, in the event, the
applicants apply before the Court concerned for expeditious disposal of
above mentioned case. 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 four 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. Before parting with the judgment, this Court would like to draw attention
of Court concerned that the law of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is
well settled and proceedings under this section are of summary nature and
are intended to enable destitute wives and children to get maintenance in a
speedy manner. The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution by
providing a speedy remedy for supply of food, clothing and shelter to the
deserted wife and children. It's primary object is to give social justice to the
women, child and infirm parents etc. It is a bounden duty of a Court
concerned to ensure compliance of binding directions issued by Apex Court
in Rajnesh vs. Neha and another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 in letter and spirit.

11. It is also provided that in the event there is any legal impediment before
                                                                                          NA529 No. 4522 of 2026
                                                                   3

                                    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.

                                    12. 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