High Court Bar Association Allahabad vs State of UP and Ors SLP (Crl) Nos 13284-13289 of 2023 Case Summary

high court bar association Allahabad v state of up

โšก ๐—ฅ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ‘๐—ฎ๐˜‚๐˜๐—ผ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ ๐˜ƒ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฎ๐˜† ๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป๐˜€๐˜ ๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ผ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ๐—ฒ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด๐˜€ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐—ฎ ๐—ฐ๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐—น ๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐—ฐ๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—บ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฎ๐—น ๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฎ๐—ณ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐—ฒ๐˜…๐—ฝ๐—ถ๐—ฟ๐˜† ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜€๐—ถ๐˜… ๐—บ๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜๐—ต๐˜€’ ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฟ๐˜‚๐—ฐ๐—ธ ๐—ฑ๐—ผ๐˜„๐—ป.

In a landmark judgement pronounced on 29แต—สฐ February 2024 by the Honโ€™ble 5- Judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in ๐™ƒ๐™ž๐™œ๐™ ๐˜พ๐™ค๐™ช๐™ง๐™ฉ ๐˜ฝ๐™–๐™ง ๐˜ผ๐™จ๐™จ๐™ค๐™˜๐™ž๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ, ๐˜ผ๐™ก๐™ก๐™–๐™๐™–๐™—๐™–๐™™ ๐™ซ๐™จ. ๐™Ž๐™ฉ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š ๐™ค๐™› ๐™.๐™‹. & ๐™Š๐™ง๐™จ. (๐™Ž๐™‡๐™‹ (๐˜พ๐™ง๐™ก.) ๐™‰๐™ค๐™จ.13284โ€“13289 ๐™ค๐™› 2023), the rule of ‘automatic vacation of stay against proceedings of a civil or criminal trial after expiry of six monthsโ€™ was struck down. The said rule was initially laid down in ๐˜ผ๐™จ๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™๐™š๐™จ๐™ช๐™ง๐™›๐™–๐™˜๐™ž๐™ฃ๐™œ ๐™ค๐™› ๐™๐™ค๐™–๐™™ ๐˜ผ๐™œ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™˜๐™ฎ ๐™‹๐™ง๐™ž๐™ซ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™š ๐™‡๐™ž๐™ข๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™š๐™™ & ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™ง. ๐™ซ. ๐˜พ๐™š๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™ง๐™–๐™ก ๐˜ฝ๐™ช๐™ง๐™š๐™–๐™ช ๐™ค๐™› ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™œ๐™–๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ค๐™ฃ (2018) 16 ๐™Ž๐˜พ๐˜พ 299.

๐Ÿ” ๐—ฅ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ถ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ถ:

๐Ÿ“Œ The directions of the Court that provide for automatic vacation of the order of stay of proceedings and the disposal of all cases in which a stay of proceeding has been granted on a day-to-day basis virtually amount to judicial legislation. The jurisdiction of this Court cannot be exercised to make such a judicial legislation.

๐Ÿ“Œ An order of vacating the order of stay of proceedings passed without hearing the beneficiary of the order is against the basic tenets of justice. Application of mind is an essential part of any decision-making process. Therefore, without application of mind, an order of interim stay of proceedings cannot be vacated only on the ground of lapse of time when the litigant is not responsible for the delay. No litigant should be allowed to suffer due to the fault of the Court.

๐Ÿ“Œ An order of interim stay of proceedings passed after hearing the contesting parties cannot be vacated by the High Court without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard to the party whose prayer for interim stay of proceedings has been granted. Even if the interim stay of proceedings is granted after hearing both sides, the aggrieved party is not precluded from applying for vacating the same on the available grounds.

Access the complete judgement in High Court Bar Association Allahabad vs State of UP and Ors SLP (Crl) Nos 13284-13289 of 2023 here:

https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2023/47928/47928_2023_1_1501_51053_Judgement_29-Feb-2024.pdf

Share on print
Print PDF
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on twitter
Twitter
See Legal News, Judgements, Jobs Monthwise

Recent Posts

About Us

Law Planet is specially created for law enthusiasts. We provide courses for various law exams. We also write about law to increase legal awareness amongst common citizens.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR BLOG!