The Allahabad High Court, in a petition seeking expedition of trial under Section 125 CrPC, held that a Section 483 CrPC application seeking a direction for expeditious disposal of an application under Section 125 CrPC would be maintainable.
Brief Facts:
The present petition was filed under Section 483 CrPC filed by two applicants seeking a direction to the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow, to expeditiously decide a petition under Section 125 CrPC.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that while deciding an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the Family Court exercises the jurisdiction of a magistrate and, therefore, an application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. will be maintainable for issuing a direction for expeditious disposal of an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Observations of the court:
The court referred to the decision of the Madhya Pradesh court in the case of Rajesh Shukla v. Meena & Anr., wherein it was held that the family courts exercise the jurisdiction of a judicial magistrate first class while handling proceedings under Chapter 9 of the CrPC.
The court stated that as the Family Court exercises jurisdiction of judicial magistrate while deciding an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., an application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction to the Family Court for expeditious disposal of an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. would be maintainable.
Further it was stated that as the petitioners' application under Section 125(1) Cr.P.C. for payment of interim maintenance is pending since 18.04.2023 although the period of sixty days provided in the third proviso appended to Section 125(1) Cr.P.C. for disposal of the application for interim maintenance has expired long ago, it would be expedient in the interest of justice that a direction be issued to the Family Court for expeditious disposal of the application for interim maintenance.
The decision of the Court:
The court allowed the petition and directed the Additional Principal Judge (APJ-07), Family Court, Lucknow, to dispose of the pending application for payment of interim maintenance to the petitioners expeditiously, keeping in view the statutory mandate contained in third proviso appended to Section 125(1) Cr.P.C.
Case Title: Shiva Pankaj and Anr. vs State of U.P. and Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Subhash Vidyarthi
Case No.: APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 426 of 2024
Advocate for the Petitioner: Annapurna Agnihotri
Advocate for the Respondent: G.A.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
