Interest Of Public At Large: Allahabad High Court Directs Registration Of PIL For Creation Of 9149 Trial Courts
The Allahabad High Court noted that there were several Petitions filed for expedited disposal of the suits and criminal cases.
The Allahabad High Court directed the registration of a PIL as a separate case for the creation of 9149 Trial Courts as the matter related to the interest of public at large.
The Court, while addressing an application under Section 483 of the CrPC, noted that there were several Petitions filed for expedited disposal of the suits, the trial of criminal cases pending before the Magistrate, the trial of session matters as well as matters related to family dispute along with other matters.
A Single Bench of Justice Rajeev Singh noted, “Learned members of the Bar jointly submitted that this issue is having wider impact on our judicial system and, therefore, requested that the issue may be dealt as Public Interest Litigation for ensuring the 9149 courts operational.”
Advocate Pankaj Kumar Verma represented the Applicant, while Additional Advocate General Kuldeep Pati Tripathi appeared for the Opposite Party.
Brief Facts
An application was filed seeking the expeditious disposal of a criminal case. The revision, related to Section 145 of the CrPC proceedings, had been pending for 14 years before the I Additional Sessions Judge, Bahraich. The Applicant prayed for a direction to dispose of the matter within a stipulated time.
However, the Court was informed that the criminal revision had already been decided on July 23, 2024, rendering the application infructuous.
Court’s Reasoning
Referring to the Apex Court’s decision in Sonu Agnihotri v. Chandra Shekhar, the High Court reiterated that “endeavour should be made within five years to increase the judge-to-population ratio in trial judiciary to 50 per million. However, the ratio of 25 per million has not been achieved till the year 2024.”
The Court noted that the members of the Bar jointly submitted that this issue had a wider impact on the judicial system and, therefore, requested that the issue be dealt as a Public Interest Litigation for ensuring the 9149 Courts were operational.
The Bench referred to the decision in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Neeraj Chaubey (2010), wherein the Supreme Court held in case of a situation, in which, an issue of public interest was involved, the same may be referred to the Bench dealing with PIL matters.
Consequently, the Court held, “In view of above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the issue related to creation of 9149 courts is related to interest of public at large and, therefore, the Registry is directed to register the PIL as a separate case and place it before Hon’ble the Chief Justice for appropriate direction.”
Accordingly, the High Court rejected the Bail Application.
Cause Title: Krishna Chandra Singh @ Munna Singh v. State Of U.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC-LKO:4893)
Appearance:
Applicant: Advocates Pankaj Kumar Verma and Karam Chand Yadav
Opposite Party: Additional Advocate General Kuldeep Pati Tripathi; AGA Rao Narendra Singh
