NOMINAL INDEX Badri Shrestha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 533 Basoo Yadav vs. Union Of India And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 534 U.P. Expressways Industrial Development Authority versus M/s. Sahakar Global Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 535 Kamla Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 536 Sidhique Kappan vs. Directorate...
NOMINAL INDEX
Badri Shrestha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 533
Basoo Yadav vs. Union Of India And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 534
U.P. Expressways Industrial Development Authority versus M/s. Sahakar Global Ltd. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 535
Kamla Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 536
Sidhique Kappan vs. Directorate Of Enforcement Thru. Assistant Director Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 537
Faisal Ashraf vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 538
XYZ vs. State of UP and 2 others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 539
Saleem vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 540
ORDERS/JUDGMENT OF THE WEEK
Lucknow Gomti River Front 'Scam'| Allahabad High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Project Advisor
Case title - Badri Shrestha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and another [Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 CR.P.C. No.2102 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 533
The Allahabad High Court denied anticipatory bail to the former advisor of Lucknow's Gomti Riverfront project who has been accused of committing huge corruption and large-scale irregularities in the implementation of the project.
Looking at the magnitude of the corruption involved in the case, the allegations against the accused-applicant, Badri Shrestha and evidence available against him, the Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh denied him anticipatory bail.
Case title - Basoo Yadav vs. Union Of India And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 29605 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 534
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the reports with regard to the non-cognizable cases could not be made the basis for rejecting an application for the issuance of a passport if they had not been investigated into.
The bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Ajit Singh observed thus while hearing a writ plea filed by one Basoo Yadav, who had moved the Court seeking the issuance of a passport in his favor.
Case Title: U.P. Expressways Industrial Development Authority versus M/s. Sahakar Global Ltd.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 535
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that while dealing with an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), seeking to restrain the invocation or encashment of the Bank Guarantee, the Court is only required to consider the terms of the Bank Guarantee Agreement and not the conditions contained in the main Contract between the parties, in terms of which the guarantee was furnished.
The bench of Justices Attau Rahman Masoodi and Om Prakash Shukla held that when an application for interim measures is filed under Section 9 of the A&C Act, seeking interference in the invocation of an unconditional Bank Guarantee, the Court is not required to interpret the contract and/or form a prima facie opinion as to whether the beneficiary of the Bank Guarantee has wrongfully invoked the Bank Guarantee. The Court ruled that such an exercise can only be done in a substantive proceeding before the Arbitral Tribunal.
Case title - Kamla Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 536
The Allahabad High Court took serious note of the conduct of certain 'unruly' advocates who raised slogans, outside the courtroom, to assault police officers, including lady officers, who were summoned by the Court in connection with a criminal writ petition.
The bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Syed Waiz Mian directed the Registrar General to conduct a discreet inquiry and submit a report in this regard identifying the unruly advocates. The case would be registered as a separate case, the Court further ordered.
Case title - Sidhique Kappan vs. Directorate Of Enforcement Thru. Assistant Director Lucknow [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13642 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 537
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan in connection with a Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case initiated against him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
Significantly, the Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh noted in its order that except for the allegations that ₹5K was transferred in the bank account of the co-accused (Atikur Rahman), there is no other transaction, either in the bank account of Kappan or in the Co-accused bank account.
"Even if it is believed that part of the proceeds of the crime was transferred to the bank account of the co-accused, Atikur Rahman that itself may not be sufficient to prove that the accused-applicant has dealt with the proceeds of crime amounting to Rs. 1,36,14,291/-which had been allegedly received by K.A. Rauf Sherif," the bench added (emphasis supplied).
Case title - Faisal Ashraf vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23696 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 538
Recently, the Allahabad Hih Court has explained as to when the written statements of the witnesses could be considered to be statements duly recorded under Section 161 of CrPC [examination of witnesses by police].
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed that if the written statement has been submitted by the witness himself to the Investigating Officer and the IO assures its genuineness and same, if reduced in writing, shall be a statement duly recorded under Section 161 CrPC.
"...there is no illegality in taking a written statement of a witness under Section 161 Cr.P.C., when it was reduced in recording in case of diary in presence of witnesses, as well as I.O., has made questions also which are also reduced in writing along with answers. The I.O. has taken sufficient precautions to ensure it to be a written statement of witnesses only," the Court remarked.
Case title - XYZ vs. State of UP and 2 others [MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6105 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 539
The Allahabad High Court last week quashed an order of a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) rejecting an application moved by a rape victim under section 156 (3) CrPC seeking a police probe in the allegations of rape made by her against the accused.
The bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi also remanded the matter back to the CJM's court with a direction to re-consider and re-visit the entire matter once again and decide the same in the light of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of XYZ vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 676.
Case title - Saleem vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15195 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 540
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a man booked under the Uttar Pradesh Prevention Of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 on the condition that he shall deposit Rs.10,000/- in the account of Gau Seva Aayog within a period of one month from his release.
The bench of Justice Shree Prakash Singh passed this order while adjudicating upon the bail plea moved by one Saleem who was booked under Sections 3/8 of the Cow Slaughter Act, 1955.
Other updates from the High Court
The Allahabad High Court has issued a notice to the Bar Council of India in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Petition seeking relevant directions pertaining to the issue of strike calls of the Advocates across the state.
The Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir has issued the notice to the Bar Council of India through its Secretary for January 18, 2023.
Essentially, in this matter, the Court had earlier asked the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to file an affidavit stating before the Court the status of all the District Bar Associations, Outlying Courts across the State, Tehsils, Commissionerate, and any other Bar Associations as to whether they are abstaining from judicial work at present, either in the continuation or for a particular day and since when.
The Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to protect the ancient temples situated in the vicinity of the Banke Bihari temple (in Mathura-Vrindavan) while implementing its proposed plan to redevelop the temple area.
The UP government has also been directed to not disturb the rights of the Sewayats for Sewa of Thakur Shri Bankey Bihari Ji Maharaj in the process of development of the area around the temple.
The bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir further sought a detailed plan from the State Government with estimated expenditure for the purchase of land or development of the area around the temple.
41 days after reserving the judgment in the matter, the Allahabad High Court last week posted the Government's appeal challenging the acquittal of Union Minister Ajay Mishra 'Teni' in Prabhat Gupta murder case 2000, for 'final hearing' in the third week of January 2023
The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Renu Agarwal passed this order after one Rajeev Gupta, claiming himself to be the son of the complainant (also revisionist) Santosh Gupta, sought to move an application for permission to submit written arguments on behalf of revisionist.
The Allahabad High Court took serious note of the conduct of certain 'unruly' advocates who raised slogans, outside the courtroom, to assault police officers, including lady officers, who were summoned by the Court in connection with a criminal writ petition.
The bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Syed Waiz Mian directed the Registrar General to conduct a discreet inquiry and submit a report in this regard identifying the unruly advocates. The case would be registered as a separate case, the Court further ordered.