Allahabad High Court
NA529/2652/2025 of ANIL KUMAR JAIN Vs STATE OF U.P. on 19 April 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 2652 of 2025 Court No. - 84 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State as also perused the record. 2. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed seeking direction to
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 529 BNSS No. - 2652 of 2025
Court No. - 84
HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State as also perused the record.
2. This application under Section 529 BNSS has been filed seeking direction to the court concerned for early disposal of Case No. 73735 of 2024 (State vs. Bharat Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 504 of 2023, under Sections- 380, 411, 457 IPC, Police Station- Tundla, District- Firozabad, pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad within stipulated period.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after submission of charge sheet, cognizance has been taken in the year 2024 and thereafter examination-in-chief of P.W.1 Anil Kumar has been recorded on 5.5.2025 but till date his cross-examination has not been completed, therefore, a substantial period of time has already lapsed.
4. In case of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 in paragraph no. 57.4, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that "In fact, it is not at all appreciable to call a witness for cross-examination after such a long span of time. It is imperative if the examination-in-chief is over, the cross- examination should be completed on the same day. If the examination of a witness continues till late hours the trial can be adjourned to the next day for cross-examination. It is inconceivable in law that the cross-examination should be deferred for such a long time. It is anathema to the concept of proper and fair trial." Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anil Kumar Jain .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is finally disposed of with a direction to the court concerned to decide the aforesaid case in accordance with law, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in case of Vinod Kumar(supra) in paragraph no. 57.4, as expeditiously as possible, without granting any unnecessary or long adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no other legal impediment. However, it is expected that both the parties shall cooperate with the trial.
April 20, 2026 KK Patel NA529 No. 2652 of 2025 2 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad