Allahabad High Court
MANNALAL PANDA @ MUNNA LALversusSTATE 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 demonstrated.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 529 BNSS seeking a direction that the trial court expedite the disposal of Criminal Case No. 471 of 2014, which involves offences under Sections 354, 504 and 506 IPC. The applicant argued that the case, pending since 2014, should be decided within a stipulated period, while the State had no objection provided the trial court was not overloaded. The High Court referred to Supreme Court precedents (Shaikh Uzma Feroz Hussain v. State of Maharashtra and High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P.) which hold that time‑bound schedules may be imposed only in extraordinary circumstances. Finding no such exceptional circumstance, the Court refused the relief sought, but permitted the applicant to move a fresh application before the trial court for expeditious disposal with specific timelines. The Court also directed the trial court to conduct proceedings in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C., Section 346 BNSS and relevant Supreme Court directions, and to disclose any legal impediment if it arises.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct a trial court to dispose of a pending criminal case within a stipulated period in the absence of exceptional circumstances.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 346, 529
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 309, 346
Subjects
- time‑bound disposal
- expeditious disposal
- criminal case pendency
- Section 309 Cr.P.C.
- Section 346 BNSS
- exceptional circumstances
- High Court direction
- Section 529 BNSS
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4533 of 2026
Mannalal Panda @ Munna Lal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahesh Dwivedi, Neeraj Chandra, Ramakar
Yadav
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 Criminal Case No. 471 of 2014 arising out of
Case Crime No. 88 of 2006, under Sections 354, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Khaga, District
Fatehpur, pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehpur 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 2014, 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
passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations."
NA529 No. 4533 of 2026
2
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. However, looking into the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, it
is expected from the learned trial Court to conduct the pending proceedings before it
strictly in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C./ Section 346 BNSS as well as in the
light of various binding directions issued by Hon'ble Apex Court from time to time
regarding compliance of aforesaid section. This Court would also like to draw the
attention of learned trial Court qua Explanation 2, which is reproduced herein-below:
"Explanation 2. – The terms on which an adjournment or postponement may be
granted include, in appropriate cases, the payment of costs by the prosecution or the
accused."
11. 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.
12. 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
Checking your session…