Rahul Yadav v. State of U.P & Anr.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard Sri Sanjeev Mishra Gana, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Mukesh Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as learned AGA for the State.

The instant appeal has been preferred with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 07.07.2023 passed learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhadohi Gyanpur in Complaint Case No.86 of 2022 (Seema Devi Vs. Rahul Yadav), under Section 323, 354-B, 427, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)da, dha of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bhadohi, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi).

Learned counsel for appellant pressed all the grounds whatsoever have been taken through the instant criminal appeal through which, it has been apprised that there is hardly any attraction of sections in which the appellant has been summoned and all these grounds have not been taken into consideration while passing the order dated 07.07.2023.

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and learned AGA for the State vehemently opposed the prayer sought through the instant appeal on the ground that summoning order has been passed after considering the material available on record.

Be that as it may, no useful purpose will be served in keeping the matter pending by way of calling counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit by the parties and as such, learned court concerned is hereby directed to expedite and finalize the proceedings of Complaint Case No.86 of 2022 (Seema Devi Vs. Rahul Yadav), under Section 323, 354-B, 427, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)da, dha of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bhadohi, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi), as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 12 months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties but after giving full opportunity of hearing to both sides.

Learned counsel for appellant assures on behalf of the appellant that he will fully cooperate with the learned trial court concerned for expeditious disposal of the said case.

However, it is made clear that till the pendency of the above mentioned complaint case, no coercive action shall be initiated against the appellant herein.