Sushma Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others

#1. Heard Sri Sanjay Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anish Kumar Upadhyay, learned AGA for the State.

#2. This application u/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking a direction upon Additional Civil Judge-VII/Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur to decide the case No.445 of 2023 (Sushma vs. Deep Chandra) under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498A IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Saraikhwaja, District-Jaunpur.

#3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the instant complaint case under Section 200 Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant on 17.8.2023 and he is seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of the aforesaid complaint case.

#4. From the order-sheet, it is reflected that after the complaint was filed, on various date, there was strike on the part of the advocates and on some dates, the Presiding Officer was on leave, therefore, the statement of the applicant as well as witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. could not be recorded in time and the statement of the applicant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 6.3.2024.

#5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that now the statement under Section 202 Cr.P.C. of the witnesses have also been recorded during the pendency of the instant application.

#6. Having gone through the record of the case, as in the instant case, even the summoning order has not yet been passed by the learned Magistrate and the statement of the witnesses has been recorded very recently and delay in recording the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. cannot be attributed to the court concerned as it was caused due to the non-cooperation of lawyers, this Court does not find any good reason to pass any positive direction in the instant case.

#7. In view thereof, the instant application u/S 482 is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 8.8.2024 LN Tripathi (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)