Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13940 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanjeev Singh @ Sanju Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Sri Jitendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kamal Singh Yadav, learned AGA alongwith Sri Ashutosh Diljan appearing for the State.
This application has been filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking a direction to the court below i.e. Special Judge, Court No.2, Gorakhpur to decide ST No.460 of 2012 (State Vs. Mantosh & Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No.955 of 2011, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 5006 IPC & 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, PS Cantt, District Gorakhpur pending in the Court of Special Judge, Gorakhpur expeditiously within a time framed as stipulated.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the victim of Case Crime No.955 of 2011 giving rise to ST No.460 of 2012 (State Vs. Mantosh & Ors.), under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 506 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, PS Cantt, District Gorakhpur pending before the Court of Special Judge, Gorakhpur. Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that proceedings of the aforesaid sessions trial are lingering on since the year 2012 where charge sheet in the case was filed on 12.12.2011, cognizance was taken on 17.11.2011 and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions in the year 2012. Charges have been framed but the trial is lingering on as the accused are not appearing and instead are seeking adjournments on one pretext or the other. Even coercive processes that have been issued have not been enforced as will appear from perusal of the order dated 31.07.2017.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case the trial court, that is to say, the Court of Special Judge, Court No.2, Gorakhpur is directed to expedite proceedings of ST No.460 of 2012 (State Vs. Mantosh & Ors.) and conclude the same within six months in accordance with the provisions of Section 309 CrPC and in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Vs State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
With the aforesaid directions, the application is finally disposed of.
The witnesses, if they do not appear on the first summons, shall have their attendance secured through immediate issue of coercive processes, and, once a witness appears he/she will not be discharged till his/her evidence is concluded.
Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Shahroz