RAVI KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri K.K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for applicants, learned Standing Counsel for State and perused the record.

(2.) It is really surprising that Bail Application No. 1122 of 2014 - Ravi Kumar Agarwal and Another Vs. State of U.P., filed on behalf of applicants is not being attended and disposed of by I/C District and Sessions Judge, Agra, as is evident from orders dated 31.5.2014 and 05.06.2014, whereby the same has been adjourned only on the ground that Advocates are on strike and request of prosecution for adjournment is accepted without assigning any reason. On 12.6.2014 the application has been adjourned only on the ground of strike of Advocates.

(3.) This approach on the part of Sessions Judge concerned is apparently illegal, inasmuch as in my view, he has failed to discharge his duties in the manner as laid down by a Seven Judges' decision of this Court in Amaravati and another Vs. State of U.P., 2004 57 AllLR 290 and approved in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 4 SCC 437.