Allahabad High Court
RAHUL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The application under Section 529 B.N.S.S. is dismissed as the applicant’s failure to file a written statement amounts to a delay caused by him.
Summary
The applicant, Rahul Yadav, filed an application under Section 529 of the B.N.S.S. seeking a direction to the Principal Judge of Family Court III, Gorakhpur, to expedite the pending criminal case (Sindhu v. Rahul) under Section 144 B.N.S.S. The applicant argued that the case had been pending since 2024 without a decision. The State opposed, noting that the applicant had appeared before the trial court but failed to file a written statement despite multiple notices and opportunities. The High Court observed that the applicant’s own delay and failure to file the required written statement constituted a delaying tactic. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application and warned the trial court to close the opportunity for filing the written statement if not done on the next date.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should direct the Family Court to decide the pending criminal case expeditiously under Section 529 B.N.S.S.
- Whether the applicant’s failure to file a written statement justifies dismissal of the application
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 144, 529
Subjects
- Family Law
- Procedural Delay
- Written Statement
- Section 529 Application
- Expeditious Trial
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4724 of 2026
Rahul Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Jeet Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the
State and perused the material on record.
The present application u/s 529 B.N.S.S. has been filed with prayer to direct
the learned Principal judge Family court III, Gorakhpur to decide the
criminal case no.1212 of 2024 (Sindhu Versus Rahul) under section 144
B.N.S.S Police Station Gagaha, District- Gorakhpur, pending in the court of
Principal judge Family court III, Gorakhpur expeditiously within stipulated
period of time.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case he is
husband of opposite party no. 2. He also submits that an application u/s 144
B.N.S.S. was moved by the wife/opposite party no. 2 against him that is
pending before the learned court from the year 2024 and has not been
decided till now, therefore, requests to direct the learned trial court to
proceed with the case expeditiously and to decide the case finally within
stipulated time period.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this
case the applicant though appeared before the learned court in pursuance to
the notice issued by the court concerned but has not been filed even W.S.
and several dates have also been fixed for this purpose. In this way there is
fault on the part of applicant himself.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by
learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record
NA529 No. 4724 of 2026
2
and the order sheet, it appears that after service of notices on the applicant he
appeared before the learned court and was directed to file W.S./objection
and even last opportunity was also given but without filing W.S. before the
learned court he has filed this application before this Court. It shows
delaying tactics on the part of applicant himself, therefore, it requires no any
direction at this stage. The learned trial court is also directed to close the
opportunity of the applicant for filing W.S. if he fails to file it on the next
date fixed.
Accordingly, this application u/s 529 B.N.S.S. is dismissed.
September 23, 2026
Suraj Srivastav
(Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SURAJ SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…