Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

On the issue of congestion around the High Court due to haphazard parking of vehicles, the Allahabad High Court last week said that "it is expected from lawyers, police authorities as well as officials of other departments that a meeting will be conducted to discuss the issue and to take a unanimous decision which may solve the problem.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery further appreciated the fact that the advocates, practicing at the High Court, were ready to cooperate with the state agencies to resolve the issue, which they themselves face on a daily basis. 

Further stressing that the matter is not an adversarial issue, court posted it on 14th October 2022 for further hearing. 

Last week, when an application under Section 482 CrPC was taken up before the bench, it was apprised by the counsel for the applicant that she had to park her car 1 kilometer away from the gate of the High Court owing to the haphazard parking around high court building. Taking note of the issue, the court had directed the S.P.Traffic, Prayagraj to appear before the Court on September 23 with an appropriate plan to manage the traffic and parking around the court building. 

In pursuance of the same, Arun Kumar Dixit, Additional Superintendent of Police (Traffic), Prayagraj appeared before the court and informed that he had taken cognizance of the issue. 

Senior Advocate Amrendra Nath Singh, whom the court had asked to assist in the matter, also appeared with a certain proposal.

Considering the same, and the assurance given by the advocates that they will help the authorities in the matter, court asked all the stakeholders to conduct a meeting at a suitable place with the prior consent of Senior Advocates R.K. Ojha and Amrendra Nath Singh, and Government Advocate S.K. Pal to discuss the issue and to take a unanimous decision.

Apart from that, regarding the application filed under Section 482, CrPC, court observed that the counsel for the applicants had not come prepared. The plea was moved seeking direction to the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Allahabad to decide a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C., pending before him within the stipulated period as fixed by the high court. 

However, the court observed that the counsel for the applicant, Advocate Saher Naqvi was unable to point out any specific provision for expeditious disposal of an application of interim maintenance as provided under the last proviso of Section 125 (1) Cr.P.C.

Therefore, court opined that at the present stage, the application under Section 482 CrPC could not be allowed and accordingly, disposed of the same. Although, the court clarified, "However, the applicant is at liberty to point out to the concerned court that there is a provision for expeditious disposal of an application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. as referred above".

Case Title: Tayyaba Begum v. State of U.P. and Another