The Allahabad High Court has delivered a sharp rebuke to a sessions court in Meerut for acting with undue haste and failing to wait for a copy of a Supreme Court order. The High Court allowed a criminal revision petition and set aside the trial court's order summoning three individuals to face trial in a 2020 double murder case.
HC Bench Denounces Trial Court's 'Approach'
In a strongly-worded order dated December 19, 2024, a single bench of Justice Kshitij Shailendra expressed clear disapproval of the trial court's conduct. The bench noted that if the Additional Sessions Judge in Meerut had simply postponed the hearing for a day or two to examine the relevant Supreme Court order, "heavens wouldn't have fallen." The High Court emphasized that courts must avoid any action that could erode public faith in the judiciary, which it termed a "sacred institution."
Timeline of the Legal Battle
The case originates from a double murder registered in Meerut in May 2020. After investigation, the police filed a chargesheet that did not include the names of the petitioners—Hamid, Akram, and Danish. However, the prosecution later filed an application to include them in the trial, which the sessions court accepted on August 17, 2024, issuing summons to the three men.
The accused challenged this order before the Allahabad High Court through a criminal revision petition in September 2024. Their counsel argued that the trial court acted hastily. He pointed out that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) related to the matter was pending before the Supreme Court until August 9, 2024, and was decided on August 14, 2024. The Supreme Court's order was uploaded on its official website on August 17, 2024—the same day the trial court passed the summons order under challenge.
The prosecution's lawyer countered that it was a serious double murder case where the accused were named in the main FIR and alleged to have directly fired the shots. He argued that removing their names based only on independent witnesses' statements was incorrect.
High Court's Reasoning and Final Order
In its detailed 18-page judgment, the High Court acknowledged that a previous order had directed a decision within 30 days. However, it firmly stated that a minor delay of a day or two to procure and consider the Supreme Court's order would not have caused any prejudice. The bench found merit in the petitioners' argument about the trial court's undue haste.
Consequently, the Allahabad High Court allowed the criminal revision petition filed by Hamid and the others. It explicitly rejected and set aside the summons order dated August 17, 2024, passed by the Meerut sessions court. The judgment serves as a reminder to lower courts to exercise patience and ensure all superior court directives are duly considered before passing orders that significantly impact the liberties of individuals.
