Subedar Ragibulla vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Alok Kumar Verma, J

The applicant-complainant Subedar Ragibulla has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to direct the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar to decide the Complaint Case No.1849 of 2016, “Subedar Ragibulla Vs. Mohd. Asif Malik alias Tahseen, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months.

Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, the learned AGA for the State/respondent no.1.

This is an innocuous prayer.

In Indian Bank Association and Others vs. Union of India and Others, (2014) 5 SCC 590, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed all the Criminal Courts in the country dealing with the cases under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 for speedy and expeditiously disposal of the cases falling under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Therefore, keeping in mind the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar is hereby directed to expedite the proceedings of the said Complaint Case No.1849 of 2016, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and complete the trial within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.788 of 2022, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is disposed of accordingly.