State v. Aquila Begum & others, arising out of Case Crime No. 5

Judgment

1. The applicants have preferred instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the proceedings of Case No. 2316 of 2013, State v. Aquila Begum & others, arising out of Case Crime No. 511 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Chakeri, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Ist, Kanpur Nagar1.

2. Earlier, on 03.01.2025, this Court has passed the following order:

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Relying upon a judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No.4479 of 2005, learned counsel for the applicants has prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings on the ground of delay in trial. He further submits that till date charges have not been framed. In view of the above, the trial court is directed to send a report regarding the status of the trial and cause for the delay in concluding the trial in Criminal Case No.2316 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No.511 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar and also the following details in tabulated form:- (1) Dates on which chargesheet was filed and the charge was framed. (2) Number of prosecution witnesses in the chargesheet. (3) Number and particulars (i.e. name, nature of witness like eye witness and expert witness etc.) of prosecution witnesses proposed to be examined as per the charge sheet. (4) List of proposed prosecution witnesses/calendar submitted before the trial court for examination during the trial. 1 ‘Additional Civil Judge’ 2 (5) Names and number of prosecution witnesses who have been examined before the trial court with dates. (6) Names and number of witnesses who have been summoned but have not attended the trial proceedings on the appointed dates with dates. (7) Names and number of witnesses against whom coercive measures have been taken out with dates. Put up this case on 4th February, 2025 as fresh. A copy of this order be communicated to the concerned court below through the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX forthwith."

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report dated 29.01.2025 from the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar has been placed on record, as is evident from the office report dated 01.02.2025. As per the report 29.01.2025, charge sheet has been filed on 04.01.2007 and charges against the accused were framed on

03.11.2010; number of witnesses in charge-sheet are six; name and particulars of prosecution witnesses to be examined as per charge-sheet are: P.W.-1 Sahana Parveen (eye witness), P.W.-2 Mohd. Taukeer (Primary Witness), P.W.-3 Kosia Khatun (eye witness); P.W.-4 Omkar Yadav (evidence of FIR), P.W.-5 HCP Badan Singh (Investigating Officer-I & P.W.-6 S.I. Rajkumari Tiwari (Investigating Officer-II). In the list of proposed prosecution witnesses submitted before the trial court for examination during the trial, names are: (1) Sahana Parveen, (2) Mohd. Taukeer, (3) Kosia Khatun, (4) Omkar Yadav, (5) HCP Badan Singh and (6) SI Rajkumari Tiwari. No prosecution witness has been examined till date. The report further says that three prosecution witnesses, namely, PW-1 Sahana Parveen, PW-2 Mohd. Taukeer & PW- 3 Kosia Khatun have been summoned by the court, they did not appear before the trial court. As regards names and number of witnesses against whom coercive measures have been taken, they are: PW-1 Sahana Parveen, PW-2 Mohd. Taukeer & PW-3 Kosia Khatun, against whom non-bailable warrants have been issued. 3

4. The aforesaid report further says that process were returned unserved with respect to PW-1, PW-2 & PW-3. It has emerged that PW- 1 Sahana Parveen and PW-3 Kosia Khatun are one and same person. It has also been mentioned in the police report that PW-1 Sahana Parveen has died. The report of Additional Civil Judge further shows that the next date fixed for prosecution evidence is 03.03.2025 and the best efforts would be taken by him to conclude the trial expeditiously.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants relying upon a judgement of Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Surya Nath & Another v. State of U.P. & Another2, and the judgements of Supreme Court in the cases of Pankaj Kumar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.3; Vakil Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar4 and Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. & Anr.5, submits that speedy trial is a right of the accused and any delay in conclusion of the trial would hamper the constitutional rights as recognized in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the present case, charge-sheet is of the year 2006 and no prosecution witness has been examined till date, therefore, in view of the law settled in the said judgements, entire proceedings are liable to be quashed.

6. Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, on the other, hand submits that the judgements as relied upon by learned counsel for the applicants are not applicable in the facts of present case. Details about the status of trial proceedings have been mentioned in the report of the concerned Additional Civil Judge, which have been mentioned in preceding paragraphs. Charges have already been framed, coercive action has been taken against the prosecution witnesses. Against three prosecution witnesses non-bailable warrants have been issued. The next date in the trial is fixed as 03.03.2025 and the Judicial Officer 2 Application U/s 482 No. 4479 of 2005, decided on 01.12.2011 3 4 5

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Relying upon a judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No.4479 of 2005, learned counsel for the applicants has prayed for quashing of the entire proceedings on the ground of delay in trial. He further submits that till date charges have not been framed. In view of the above, the trial court is directed to send a report regarding the status of the trial and cause for the delay in concluding the trial in Criminal Case No.2316 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No.511 of 2006, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Chakeri, District- Kanpur Nagar and also the following details in tabulated form:- (1) Dates on which chargesheet was filed and the charge was framed. (2) Number of prosecution witnesses in the chargesheet. (3) Number and particulars (i.e. name, nature of witness like eye witness and expert witness etc.) of prosecution witnesses proposed to be examined as per the charge sheet. (4) List of proposed prosecution witnesses/calendar submitted before the trial court for examination during the trial. 1 ‘Additional Civil Judge’ 2 (5) Names and number of prosecution witnesses who have been examined before the trial court with dates. (6) Names and number of witnesses who have been summoned but have not attended the trial proceedings on the appointed dates with dates. (7) Names and number of witnesses against whom coercive measures have been taken out with dates. Put up this case on 4th February, 2025 as fresh. A copy of this order be communicated to the concerned court below through the learned District Judge, Kanpur Nagar by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX forthwith."

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report dated 29.01.2025 from the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 1, Kanpur Nagar has been placed on record, as is evident from the office report dated 01.02.2025. As per the report 29.01.2025, charge sheet has been filed on 04.01.2007 and charges against the accused were framed on

03.11.2010; number of witnesses in charge-sheet are six; name and particulars of prosecution witnesses to be examined as per charge-sheet are: P.W.-1 Sahana Parveen (eye witness), P.W.-2 Mohd. Taukeer (Primary Witness), P.W.-3 Kosia Khatun (eye witness); P.W.-4 Omkar Yadav (evidence of FIR), P.W.-5 HCP Badan Singh (Investigating Officer-I & P.W.-6 S.I. Rajkumari Tiwari (Investigating Officer-II). In the list of proposed prosecution witnesses submitted before the trial court for examination during the trial, names are: (1) Sahana Parveen, (2) Mohd. Taukeer, (3) Kosia Khatun, (4) Omkar Yadav, (5) HCP Badan Singh and (6) SI Rajkumari Tiwari. No prosecution witness has been examined till date. The report further says that three prosecution witnesses, namely, PW-1 Sahana Parveen, PW-2 Mohd. Taukeer & PW- 3 Kosia Khatun have been summoned by the court, they did not appear before the trial court. As regards names and number of witnesses against whom coercive measures have been taken, they are: PW-1 Sahana Parveen, PW-2 Mohd. Taukeer & PW-3 Kosia Khatun, against whom non-bailable warrants have been issued. 3

4. The aforesaid report further says that process were returned unserved with respect to PW-1, PW-2 & PW-3. It has emerged that PW- 1 Sahana Parveen and PW-3 Kosia Khatun are one and same person. It has also been mentioned in the police report that PW-1 Sahana Parveen has died. The report of Additional Civil Judge further shows that the next date fixed for prosecution evidence is 03.03.2025 and the best efforts would be taken by him to conclude the trial expeditiously.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants relying upon a judgement of Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Surya Nath & Another v. State of U.P. & Another2, and the judgements of Supreme Court in the cases of Pankaj Kumar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.3; Vakil Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar4 and Sunil Kumar v. State of U.P. & Anr.5, submits that speedy trial is a right of the accused and any delay in conclusion of the trial would hamper the constitutional rights as recognized in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the present case, charge-sheet is of the year 2006 and no prosecution witness has been examined till date, therefore, in view of the law settled in the said judgements, entire proceedings are liable to be quashed.

6. Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State, on the other, hand submits that the judgements as relied upon by learned counsel for the applicants are not applicable in the facts of present case. Details about the status of trial proceedings have been mentioned in the report of the concerned Additional Civil Judge, which have been mentioned in preceding paragraphs. Charges have already been framed, coercive action has been taken against the prosecution witnesses. Against three prosecution witnesses non-bailable warrants have been issued. The next date in the trial is fixed as 03.03.2025 and the Judicial Officer 2 Application U/s 482 No. 4479 of 2005, decided on 01.12.2011 3 4 5