Judgments/Orders of January 20221. 'Prayers Omnibus In Nature': Allahabad High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL On Alleged Corruption In MadarsasCase title - Mohammad Imran v. State Of U.P. Thru Addl.Chief Secy.Minority Wefare And Ors.Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 1The High Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by a farmer to point out corruption in...
Judgments/Orders of January 2022
Case title - Mohammad Imran v. State Of U.P. Thru Addl.Chief Secy.Minority Wefare And Ors.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 1
The High Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by a farmer to point out corruption in the appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff in certain Madarsas as the Court noted that the plea contained omnibus prayers.
"...it is apparent that the prayers, instead of being specific, are omnibus in nature. The prayer to issue such directions is absolutely vague and general in nature," The Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed after perusing the prayers of the PIL.
Case title - Farhan Ahmad (Shanu) v. State Of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 2
The High Court denied bail to a man accused of committing Rape by establishing a physical relationship with the Victim on a false promise to marry her and thereafter, threatening her to accept the Muslim religion.
The Bench of Justice Om Prakash Tripathi was dealing with the bail plea of one Farhan Ahmad (Shanu) who contended that he is innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case only for the purpose of blackmailing.
Case title - Sheshmani Nath Tripathi v. E.C.I.Thru. Chief Election Commissioner,New Delhi & Anr
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 3
The High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea which sought quashing of the order of recognition given to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Indian National Congress (INC) as National Parties by the Election Commissions of India (ECI) and further, allotting symbols to them.
Essentially, the Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Saroj Yadav was hearing a PIL filed by the petitioner, Sheshmani Nath Tripathi (leader of Samajwadi Party) challenging the 1989 order by the ECI recognizing BJP and INC as a National Party and reserving "Lotus" and "Hand" symbols for them.
Case Title- Smt. Prabha Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 4
The Allahabad High Court has recently held in a case challenging land acquisition proceedings that private interest has to give way to the larger public interest.
Upholding the proceedings for construction of a railway over-bridge, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Piyush Agarwal observed,
"Private interest has to give way to the larger public interest. Even if there are some small discrepancies in the process of acquisition, in our opinion in the facts of the present case, the acquisition does not deserve to be set aside as otherwise the project will be delayed which will cause loss to the State besides suffering to the residents of the area, who may be deprived of using the railway over-bridge on account of delayed completion of the project. In any case, the petitioner will be duly compensated for the land owned by her."
Case title - Aryan Srivastava v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 5
The High Court directed the District Magistrate, Jaunpur to examine and pass a reasoned order in a claim for compensation made in a case of a teacher's death who died due to COVID during the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Polls last year.
The Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan was hearing the plea of one Aryan Srivastava whose mother was assigned election duty in UP Panchayat Elections during which she contracted COVID-19 and died thereafter.
6. Offence Punishable U/S 506 IPC If Committed In Uttar Pradesh Is A Cognizable Offence: Allahabad High Court
Case title - Rakesh Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 6
The High Court observed that an offence under Section 506 IPC (Punishment for criminal intimidation), if committed in the State of Uttar Pradesh is a cognizable offence
To conclude thus, the Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi referred to a notification published in the U.P. Gazette dated 31st July 1989, notifying the declaration made by the then Hon'ble Governor of UP that any offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC when committed in Uttar Pradesh, shall be cognizable and non-bailable.
Case title - Janki Prasad v. Sanjay Kumar And Ors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 7
The High Court recently ruled that when an appeal has to be dismissed by the appellate Court on account of the fact that the counsel for the appellant though physically present in the Court, refuses to argue the same for any reason, the dismissal can't be on merits in view of the Explanation to Order XLI Rule 17 CPC.
Explanation to Order XLI Rule 17 CPC states that the appellate Court can't dismiss the appeal on the merits in cases where on the day fixed, or on any other day to which the hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear when the appeal is called on for hearing.
Agaisnt this backdrop, the Bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai, while dealing with the Second Appeal of one Janki Prasad held the following:
"...the Explanation to Order XLI Rule 17 CPC also applies in cases where the counsel for the appellant, though physically present in the Court when the appeal is called on for hearing, refuses to argue the appeal or for any other reason is not able to address the Court and in such situations, the appellate Court has no jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merits."
Case title - Ashwani Kumar v. State of U.P. connected wiith Atul Kumar And 2 Ors. v. State of U.P.
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 8
Noting that the prosecution, as a matter of routine, does not lay emphasis on the production of independent witnesses during the course of the trial, the Allahabad High Court observed that the failure of the investigating agency to record statements of such witnesses during an investigation must be viewed seriously by the courts of law.
Dealing with a criminal appeal against a murder conviction where no independent witnesses were examined or produced, the Bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Manish Kumar was of the further opinion that, that time is not far when the courts may have to invoke the suo motu powers to summon such witnesses for which there ought to exist a witness protection law.
Case title - Mahendra Pal Singh Lekhpal And Another v. State of U.P. and AnotherCase Citaiton: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 9
The High Court observed that an application under Section 482 CrPC is maintainable to quash the proceedings, which are ex facie bad for want of sanction as required under Section 197 of Crpc (Prosecution of Judges and public servants).
With this, the Bench of Justice Chandra Kumar Rai set aside a summoning order passed by the Judicial Magistrate Farrukhabad against a Lekhpal (applicant number 1) and a Kanoongo (applicant number 2) in the Consolidation department (both public servants) without obtaining necessary sanction as provided under Section 197 of CrPC.
Case Title: S/S Shri Surya Traders v. Union Of India And 4 OthersCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 10
In a case pertaining to wrongful seizure of a consignment by State authorities citing non-compliance with the provisions of UP GST Act, a single judge bench of Allahabad High Court has observed that "State government has tried to create an atmosphere for free flow of trade and commerce so that a good business environment can be developed in the State of Uttar Pradesh which can be used for development purpose but the State Authorities in their whims and fancies, are bent upon to harass the trading community of the state and the present case is a glaring example of this mischievousness of the State Authorities which needs to be checked at the end of the State government immediately."
Case title - Neeraj Mandal @ Rakesh v. State of U.P and connected mattersCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 11
While denying bail to 4 persons accused of fraudulently withdrawing money from the bank account of a retired High Court Judge, the Allahabad High Court today observed that those who deposit money in banks are honest and it is the responsibility of the banks to keep their money safe 'at any cost'.
The Bench of Justice Shekhar Yadav also observed that those people who do not deposit crores of rupees in the bank and rather hide the same in the basements of their houses, are responsible for hollowing out the economic prosperity of the country.
Opining that the bank has to take responsibility for such cases wherein the money of their customers is withdrawn by cybercriminals as such customers are more honest towards the country since they put their white money in banks.
"Bank account holders' money should be safe. Not only because the customer deposits money in the bank so that he/she can withdraw it when needed, but also because the money deposited by the customers in the bank is white and due to which, the economic condition of the country also improves. On the other hand, there are people in the country who do not deposit crores of rupees in the bank and keep it hidden in the basements of their houses. The banks do not get any benefit from it, and they also hollow out the economic condition of the country. In such a situation, that customer of the bank is more honest towards the country and his money should be kept safe by the bank at all costs and if in any way the money is withdrawn by cybercriminals, then for this, the bank has to take responsibility for it," the Court opined.
Case title - Neeraj Mandal @ Rakesh v. State of U.P and connected mattersCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 11
While denying bail to 4 persons accused of fraudulently withdrawing money from the bank account of a retired High Court Judge, the High Court expressed its agreement with a submission made by the Union Government regarding the filing of a review petition against the Supreme Court's 2018 Adhaar Verdict before the SC.
In its 2018 Verdict, the Supreme Court had ruled that the move of mandatory linking of Aadhaar with bank account does not satisfy the test of proportionality.
Essentially, the Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav was hearing the submissions of RBI, State Government, BSNL, and Union government regarding the measures that could be taken to tackle cyber frauds/cyber crimes/fraudulent withdrawal of money from banks.
Case title - Anurag Mehrotra v. State Of U.P.Thru Addl.Chief Secy.Finance Deptt. Lko & Ors.Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 12
The High Court has observed that any rule framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India can only be replaced by an Act of an appropriate legislature and the same cannot be replaced by an executive order issued under Article 162 of the Constitution of India.
The Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary observed thus as it set aside a government's order of 1986 withdrawing the benefit of bonus required to be paid under Rule 12 of the General Provident Fund (U.P.), Rules, 1985.
Case title - Roop Lal and Anr v. Suresh Kumar Yadav and 2 Ors.Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 13
Referring to a Supreme Court's Judgment delivered in 2021, the High Court observed that fixing notional income at Rs.15,000/- per annum for a family's non-earning members is not just and reasonable.
The Bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Ajai Tyagi was hearing an appeal filed by the parents of a 7-year-old deceased boy, seeking enhancement of quantum, against Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's order awarding Rs.1,80,000 as compensation with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum.
Case title - Sanjeev Rai v. State of U.P. and Another
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 14
Emphasizing that it is the duty and responsibility of the husband to maintain his wife with all dignity, the High Court recently observed that nowadays, it is extremely difficult to conceive that a woman would be in a position to maintain her with the amount of Rs. 1500/- per month.
The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh further remarked that the amount of ₹1500 as interim maintenance is not only a meager amount but also insufficient for the wife to maintain herself.
Case title - Gulfam v. State of U.P. and Another
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 15
The High Court has observed that a Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge has jurisdiction to take cognizance of offences under the Electricity Act, 2003 notwithstanding Section 193 of CrPC by virtue of Section 153 of the Electricity Act.
The Bench of Justice Rajeev Misra concluded thus while hearing a Section 482 application filed by one Gulfam challenging the charge sheet filed against him under Sections 135-1(A) Electricity Act [Theft of Electricity] and cognizance taking the order of the Special Judge (E.C. Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 16
The High Court granted bail to 2 real brothers who have been accused of committing gang-rape upon a victim as the Court noted that she, after leveling the allegations, never admitted for any medical examination so as to establish the fact of gang rape upon her.
"This is the serious matter wherein the attending circumstances, it is required to establish the authenticity of the allegations. It is mandatory and obligatory on the part of the victim to get herself medically examined so as to substantiate the allegation of rape. It is not her choice to admit or not to admit for the medical examination," the bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi observed while granting bail to 2 real brothers/accused.
Case title - Atul Kumar and another v. Election Commission of Bharat
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 17
The High Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed in the Allahabad High Court seeking postponement of elections for the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly (scheduled to be held in Feb-March 2022) in view of the COVID surge.
The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Narendra Kumar Johari heard the case and after the arguments, the court refused to entertain the PIL and said that reasons for the same shall be recorded later on.
Case title - Anoop Kumar Mishra State Of U P And 8 Others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 18
Observing that the railways' administration has miserably failed in its duty to prevent encroachment over its land, the High Court today issued a slew of directions to eradicate the menace of encroachment over the Railway land.
The Bench of Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava perceived the encroachment over the Railway land as a menace/hindrance to development which ultimately results in the average Indian citizen being deprived of better amenities and experiences.
Case title - Rajneesh Kumar Gupta Second Bail v. U.O.I. Through Intelligence Officer N.C.B. Lucknow
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 19
While granting bail to an accused booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, the High Court recently imposed directed him to deposit a bank draft of ₹5 Lacs in the account of 'Army Battle Casualty Welfare Fund'.
The Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh has asked the accused, Rajneesh Kumar Gupta to deposit the said amount and submit a receipt thereof before the trial Court.
21. Magistrate Can 'Monitor' An Investigation In Exercise Of Power U/S 156(3) CrPC: Allahabad High Court
Case title - Satyaprakash v. State Of U.P And 6 Others
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 20
The High Court has observed that the Magistrate has the power to monitor investigation in the exercise of his power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
The Bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma observed thus while referring to Supreme Court's 2016 ruling in the case of Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe Vs. Hemant Yashwant Dhage, (2016) 6 SCC 277, wherein it was explicitly observed that a person aggrieved with the way investigation being done in a matter, can move an application before the Magistrate under section 156 (3) CrPC as the Magistrate is empowered to even monitor an investigation under the said provision
Case title - Najeeruddin v. State of U.P
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 21
The High Court rejected the reference made to it to confirm the death penalty awarded to an accused in connection with a rape and murder case and directed the Sessions Court to conduct a retrial in the matter.
The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Sameer Jain was dealing with the appeal of one Najeeruddin, who had been held guilty of murdering 3 persons from the same family and also raping a minor girl.
Case title - Sanni Singh v. State Of U P And Another
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 22
"Caste system in our society is deep-rooted, we boast ourselves as an educated society but we live our lives with double standards. Even after 75 years of Independence, we are not able to get out with this social menace," remarked High Court as it granted bail to a murder accused in connection with an alleged Honour Killing case.
The Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi also observed that it is the moral duty of those sane people, who are well-off, to protect the underprivileged and downtrodden so that they feel safe, secure and comfortable.
"Simultaneously, the other group also feel that they are the integral and inseparable part of the society and it is in the larger interest of the country and high time for the introspection for everyone to give serious thought over the matter," the Court further added.
Case title - Dayalbagh Education Institute v. Election Commission Of India And 2 Others
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 23
The High Court dismissed a plea filed praying for a direction to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to provide online training to the presiding officers (who are susceptible to COVID), for the upcoming assembly polls in the State.
The matter was heard in a special hearing conducted on Sunday by the Bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav and it had sought ECI's reply as to whether training through online mode can be given to such individuals who were immunocompromised and whose family members were at risk.
Related news: UP Assembly Polls 2022- Can Officers Who Are Susceptible To COVID Be Given Online Training?: Allahabad HC Asks ECI
Case title - Dlshad @ Dillu v. State of U.P
Case Citaiton: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 24
The High Court directed departmental action against the Assistant Registrar of the High Court who failed to list a particular case in the fresh list and send the case file to the court citing various administrative instructions and remained defiant even when enquired by the HC about his failure to perform his duty.
Significantly, when the Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot called him personally and asked him about the lapse on his part, he reiterated his stand that the order cannot be complied with due to administrative instructions.
Against this backdrop, noting that he remained defiant, the Bench ordered departmental action against him after terming his conduct as interfering with the administration of justice.
"...the Court cannot remain silent spectator to such acts of grave misconduct and deliberate defiance of orders passed by this Court by officers of the registry. Such conduct interferes with the administration of justice. In case such officials are given free run, public at large will lose faith in the judicial system," the Court further remarked.
26. UP Govt Informs Allahabad High Court About Its Preparedness To Hold Magh Mela Amid COVID Spread
Case title - Utkarsh Mishra v. State of U.P. and others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 25
The Uttar Pradesh government informed the High Court about its preparedness to hold Magh Mela amid COVID spread.
The UP Govt submitted its response on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed before the Court seeking a direction to the state government to prevent devotees from bathing in/participating in the Mela on the auspicious dates i.e. Shahi Snan on account of COVID spread.
The Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Piyush Agrawal was told that the UP government has already issued guidelines to be followed by the devotees who come to the Magh Mela.
Case title - Rishi Kumar Trivedi v. Election Commission of Bharat and Anr.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 26
The High Court refused to entertain another Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking postponement of elections for the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly (scheduled to be held in Feb-March 2022) in view of the COVID surge.
The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta wasn't convinced to interfere on the basis of the ground raised in the PIL i.e. Pandemic as it noted that the Commission, being a constitutional body, must have taken into consideration the pandemic situation, with utmost responsibility.
The instant plea, moved by one Rishi Kumar Pandey, the State Head of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Maha Sabha, had submitted before the Court that COVID will spread drastically if the election is conducted as per the scheduled as were are currently dealing with the third phase of COVID.
Related News: "Haven't People Lost Lives At Homes Too?": Allahabad HC In Plea Seeking Postponement Of UP Assembly Polls Amid COVID Surge
Case title - Kanika Construction v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 27
The High Court recently observed that there is no absolute bar on the maintainability of a writ petition against the state and its instrumentalities in contractual matters.
The Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava remarked that where the amount is admitted and there is no disputed question of fact requiring adjudication of detailed evidence and interpretation of the terms of the contract, a writ would very well lie against the State and its instrumentalities.
Case title - Shradha Kannaujia (Minor) And Another v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 28
The High Court has observed that the power of the High Court in granting a writ of Habeas Corpus in child custody matters may be invoked only in cases where the detention of a minor is by a person, who is not entitled to his/her legal custody.
In view of this, the Bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh dismissed a Habeas plea filed by the mother of a 5-year-old girl seeking minor's custody from her father (her husband) as the Court noted that the appropriate remedy in such matters would lie under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 or Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.
Important Monthly Updates From the High Court
Case title - Imtiyaj Ali & Ors. v. Addl.Commissioner Faizabad-I,Mandal Ayodhya,Ayodhya & Anr
The High Court observed that the Members of the Bar are free to hold a meeting to condole the demise of any member or anyone else, but they do not have the right to obstruct the functioning of Courts.
The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir observed this while dealing with the affidavits filed before it by the President and the Secretary of Commissioner Court's Bar Association, Ayodhya tendering their unconditional apology for the repeated strikes.
Case title - Sanjay Goel and another v. State Of U.P. and 2 Others
The High Court stayed a First Information Report (FIR) registered against the Director and Manager of OPPO Mobiles India Pvt. Ltd. in an alleged mobile explosion case.
Essentially, a case had been registered against the Director and Manager of OPPO Mobiles India Pvt. Ltd. pursuant to the lodging of an FIR by the third respondent/informant alleging that he bought a mobile phone of OPPO brand in July 2019 and the said mobile phone exploded in his pocket on September 2020, due to which he sustained injuries.
In order to make virtual court proceedings more efficient and user-friendly, the Allahabad High Court has decided to adopt the CISCO WebEx Events platform for video conferencing at Lucknow Bench.
This development comes almost 6 months after the Allahabad High Court (at Prayagraj bench) decided to adopt the CISCO WebEx Events platform for video conferencing at Allahabad in place of the JITSI Meet platform.
Case title - Smt. Kusum Chaturvedi And Another v. Bhupendra Prasad
Expressing its dismay over the progress of a civil suit and the way the concerned Judge at Mathura Court fixed the dates in the matter, the Allahabad High Court on Monday observed that even during a severe COVID-19 upsurge, judicial function, like many other solemn functions of the State, can't be shut down.
The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir further remarked that for the time being, the CoViD-19 pandemic upsurge is a recurrent feature and thus, it does not mean that the functioning of Courts should come to a standstill.
"The Courts must function and discharge their duties by adopting and adapting ways and means necessary for the dispensation of justice. During a severe CoViD-19 upsurge, judicial function, like many other solemn functions of the State, may be discharged differently, but they cannot be forsaken or the system of justice shut down," the Court observed.
Case title - Atul Kumar and another v. Election Commission of Bharat
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea has been moved in the High Court seeking postponement of elections for the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly in view of the COVID surge.
While seeking a direction to the Election Commission of 'Bharat' to hold the said elections in April and May 2022 (rather than February and March 2022), the petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the election schedule fixed by the Election Commission.
UAPA Accused Atiq Ur Rehman, Mohd. Masud and Alam have moved the Allahabad High Court seeking charge sheet copies, other documents in the case registered against them after they were held by UP Police in 2020 while they were on their way to Hathras to meet the family members of gang rape and murder victim.
It may be noted that they were held along with a Kerala journalist (Siddique Kappan) and they all were slapped with Sedition and UAPA.
The High Court will hear the arguments in Ashish Mishra's bail plea (filed in connection with a case filed against him on murder charges for the Lakhimpur Kheri incident) on January 18, 2022.
Mishra, the son of Union Minister of State for Home Affairs and BJP MP Ajay Kumar Mishra is the prime accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri Violence case is under police custody and has moved to the Allahabad High Court seeking bail in the case.
On Tuesday (January 11), the counsel appearing on behalf of Mishra prayed before the Bench of Justice Rajeev Singh that the matter be listed on January 18, and on that day, Senior Advocate Gopal Chaturvedi would be arguing the matter.
In view of this, the Court has now listed the matter on January 18. It may be noted that the affidavits have already been exchanged between the parties.
Case Title - Mohit Yadav v. Union Of India Through Secretary Ministry Of Youth Affairs And Sports And Others
The High Court has directed the Sports Authority of India to ensure participation of the Indian Handball national team in the 20th Asian Men's Handball Championship, scheduled to be held from Jan 18 to Jan 31 in Saudi Arabia.
This order was made by the bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Narendra Kumar Johari which was hearing the writ plea of a member of the Indian Team, Mohit Yadav.
Essentially, Yadav had moved the High Court highlighting the fact that the budget for sponsoring the Indian team to participate in the tournament was earmarked by the Sports Authority of India, however, the same was not being released on account of some election proceedings taking place to constitute the management body in Handball Federation of India.
"It takes a lot of courage for a woman employee to make the imputations of such a serious nature against that very P.O. under whom she has been working," a UP Court observed as it denies anticipatory bail to the Presiding Officer of Commercial Court, Jhansi of raping a woman employee working under her.
The Sessions Judge, Jhansi Jyotsna Sharma was hearing the anticipatory bail to the judicial officer, Kautilya Gaur who has been booked under sections 376, 511, 354A, 354B, 509, 323, 504,506 IPC in a 2020 case registered by a ministerial staff working in the court of Accused-Judge
The High Court today concluded the final hearing in the bail plea filed by Ashish Mishra, prime accused in the Lakhimpur Kheri incident. Appearing for him, Senior Counsel GD Chaturvedi argued that Mishra was not driving the car which allegedly mowed down farmers/protestors on October 3, 2021.
Restoring a suo moto case registered in the year 2020, the High Court last week extended the life of all interim orders passed by the High Court and courts subordinate to it, including the Tribunals till February 28, 2022, in light of the Covid-19 situation in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
A letter petition has been filed before the High Court alleging that Allahabad, Allahabad, Mangla Prasad Tripathi was cremated without proper investigation by the police department on January 18, 2022, and further seeking CBI inquiry into the matter.
The letter petition has been moved by Advocates, Gaurav Dwivedi, Rajneesh Kumar Singh, O.P. Singh, Saurabh Singh, Rohit Pandey and Prabhakar Jaiswal, who all are currently practicing at the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
13. Step-Motherly Treatment Being Given To 'Sanskrit' Language In Uttar Pradesh: Allahabad High Court
Case title - Badri Nath Tripathi v. State Of U.P. Through Its Secretary, And 4 Others
The High Court has observed that in the State of Uttar Pradesh, the state is giving stepmotherly treatment to the Sanskrit Language and further, sought a response from the UP Government as to why it is not creating a regular post of Sanskrit Teacher in the state.
The bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal observed thus as it noted that in the state of UP, no post of Lecturer (Sanskrit) has been sanctioned and the Lecturer appointed for teaching Hindi, having studied in High School, Intermediate and in Graduation with subject 'Sanskrit', is being made to teach Sanskrit.
Case title - Avaneesh Kumar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
The High Court remarked that the State Education Department and its officers are not attending to the grievances that are raised against it and that they are performing their duties in a very casual manner.
With this observation, the Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal directed the Principal Secretary, Basic Education, Government of Uttar Pradesh to ensure that all the District Basic Education Officers start performing their duties promptly and to take the final call on all the matters which come before them for consideration at the earliest.
Arguments in the bail application of Anand Giri, the prime accused in the alleged suicidal death of Mahant Narendra Giri could not take place today as the CBI's counsel wasn't available and therefore, the matter was adjourned to January 31.
Giri has been booked for allegedly abetting the suicide of Mahant Narendra Giri, the President of Akhil Bhartiya Akhara Parishad and the matter is currently being probed by the CBI. Anand Giri is presently under custody and has moved the HC with his bail plea.
The case was adjourned on a request made by the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is currently probing the matter, on account of the unavailability of its lead counsel due to his illness.
Case title - Bharti Patel And 5 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Basic Education Deptt. Lko. And 9 Others
The High Court has stayed the decision of the Uttar Pradesh government to appoint 6800 additional candidates as primary assistant teachers in the state in addition to already appointed 69000 candidates.
The Bench of Justice Rajan Roy made it clear that the Government can't appoint more than 69000 candidates without issuing an advertisement regarding the same, since in the original advertisement issued by the state, only 69000 posts were intended to be filled.
Observing that some of the orders, statements, and office reports in the Subordinate Courts are written in bad handwriting that the same cannot be read properly, the High Court warned erring officials of action in case they fail to write legible orders.
It may be noted that in October 2021, the Allahabad High Court had observed in its order that it is the bounded duty of the Peshkars/ Court Readers to write the Court order in a legible manner, failing which, it may be treated as misconduct.
Weekly round-ups week-wise
Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: January 3 To January 9, 2022
Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: January 10 To January 16, 2022
Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: January 17 To January 23, 2022
Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: January 24 To January 30, 2022