Allahabad High Court

NA529/4411/2026 of JAGMAL SINGH Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 7 OTHERS on 5 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4411 of 2026 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State as also perused the record. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed seeking direction to the

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 4411 of 2026 Court No. - 82 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State as also perused the record. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed seeking direction to the court concerned to conclude the trial of S.T. No. 1024 of 2020 (State vs. Sunil and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 140 of 2020, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 452, 302, 307, 504, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station Mundali, District Meerut, pending before the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 10, Meerut, expeditiously within stipulated period. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that vide order dated 18.07.2022 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No. 11259 of 2022 (Jagmal Singh v. State of U.P. and Another), the learned trial court was directed to expedite the proceedings of the case and to make all endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, on a day-to-day basis, in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C., without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. It is further submitted that, in compliance with the aforesaid direction, 13 prosecution witnesses out of a total of 14 prosecution witnesses have already been examined, and only the Investigating Officer remains to be examined. However, despite the aforesaid order and the substantial progress already made in the trial, the trial has not yet been concluded and remains pending. The continued pendency of the trial, despite the specific Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Shukla, U.C. Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Jagmal Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 7 Others .....Opposite Party(s)

direction of this Court for its expeditious disposal, is causing undue delay and prejudice to the applicant. Looking to the aforesaid circumstances, it is directed that trial pending before the concerned court be concluded expeditiously, as early as possible, within a period of three months, from the date of filing of certified copy of this order, in accordance law, without granting any unnecessary or long adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment. The application is disposed of. October 6, 2026 Brijesh NA529 No. 4411 of 2026 2 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead