Stale and Futile Cases Must Be ‘Chiselled Off’: Allahabad High Court Quashes 1991 Case

Calling for stale and futile criminal cases to be “chiselled off” from trial court dockets, the Allahabad High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings pending since 1991 in a case relating to an alleged ruckus near the Vidhan Sabha, holding that such prosecutions only waste scarce judicial resources and violate the accused’s right to a speedy trial.

The bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia, while allowing two connected applications under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, underscored the need for an effective policy to weed out long-pending cases that have outlived their utility.

Court noted that continuation of such trials adds to the already overwhelming burden on the judiciary, which is “starved of resources” amid an explosion of litigation.

The observations came while quashing proceedings arising out of a 1991 FIR lodged at Hazratganj police station, Lucknow, alleging that a group of 30–40 persons had created a ruckus outside Gate No. 1 of the Vidhan Sabha on February 15 that year. As per the FIR, some persons allegedly attempted to force entry into the Vidhan Sabha premises, climbed the boundary wall, and damaged public property, including vehicles parked nearby.

Following investigation, a charge sheet was filed in February 1992 under Sections 147, 353, 452, and 427 of the IPC, along with Section 7 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act and Section 2 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. Cognizance was taken by the trial court, but the case saw virtually no progress for decades.

The high court noted from the order sheets that not a single prosecution witness had been examined even after more than 30 years. It further recorded that several accused had not been served despite repeated issuance of summons and warrants, contributing to the prolonged stagnation of the trial. The charge sheet showed that all prosecution witnesses were police officers who were on duty at the time of the incident, most of whom had since retired.

During the hearing, the State informed the court that it had constituted a three-member committee, headed by an additional advocate general, to frame a policy for efficient management and withdrawal of stale and futile cases, in line with directives issued by the Union government. While no final decision had been taken yet, the State submitted that the committee was actively considering measures to address the issue.

Turning to the merits of the case, tcourt found that the essential ingredients of the offences alleged were missing. With respect to rioting under Section 147 IPC, the court held that neither the FIR nor the charge sheet disclosed material indicating use of force or violence by an unlawful assembly in prosecution of a common object.

Similarly, court held that the offence under Section 353 IPC was not made out, as there was no material to show assault or use of criminal force to deter a public servant from discharging official duties. The allegations, the court said, fell short of the statutory requirements.

Court also rejected the charge under Section 452 IPC, observing that the Vidhan Sabha premises could not be treated as a “house” within the meaning of Section 442 IPC. It further noted that there were no allegations of preparation for causing hurt, assault, or wrongful restraint, which are mandatory prerequisites for invoking Section 452.

As regards the offence under Section 427 IPC, court pointed out that the charge sheet failed to specify what property was damaged or establish that the alleged damage exceeded the statutory threshold of fifty rupees. In the absence of such details, the offence could not be sustained, court held. 

Apart from the lack of material evidence, court held that the extraordinary delay in the trial itself warranted quashing of the proceedings. It observed that continuing a prosecution where witnesses were unavailable and the likelihood of a meaningful trial was negligible amounted to a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.

Quashing the entire proceedings arising out of the 1991 case, court expressed hope that the State would act on the committee’s recommendations to “chop off the deadwood” of stale litigations, so that judicial efficiency could be restored and trial courts relieved of avoidable burdens.

Case Title: Madhukar Sharma vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and Another with Connected Matter

Judgment Date: January 28, 2026

Bench: Justice Pankaj Bhatia