Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 23 To September 29, 2024

Vihari And 2 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 589

Rabiya vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 590

Arun Mishra vs. Honble Mrs Justice Sunita Agrawal, The Then Puine Judge Of This High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 591

Kishore Shankar Signapurkar v. State Of U.P. And Anr 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 592

Shahrukh Khan And Another vs. State Of UP 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 593

Dr. Rajesh Singh And Another v. State of U.P. and Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 594

Smt. Tripti Singh v. Ajat Shatru 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 595

Jitendra Kumar Keshwani v. State Of U.P. And Anr 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 596

In Re v. Shri Yogendra Trivedi 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 597

Subhash Chandra v. Srikant Goswami Posted Managing Director, Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd. Lucknow And 2 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 598

'X' Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 599

Asif vs. State Of Up And 2 Others and connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 600

Mahavir Prasad v. Balveer Singh And Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 601

Smt Kriti Goyal v. Dev Suman Goyal And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 602

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. And 3 Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 603

Manoj vs. State of U.P. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 604

Orders/Judgments of the Week

SC/ST Act Being Misused For Financial Gains: Allahabad HC Bats For Pre-FIR Assessment Of Credibility Of Complaints

Case title - Vihari And 2 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 589

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 589

The Allahabad High Court reiterated its concerns over the misuse of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. The court observed that the 1989Act, which was designed to provide immediate relief to victims of atrocities, is being misused by some individuals to obtain compensation.

The Court underscored that the misuse of the 1989 law not only harms the credibility of the justice system but also hinders the progress toward achieving genuine equality for those who continue to face prejudice and marginalisation.

Allahabad HC Notes 'Trend' Of Filing Of Fresh FIRs Against Accused To Create Grounds For Bail Cancellation

Case title - Rabiya vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 590

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 590

The Allahabad High Court noted a 'trend' in which fresh FIRs/complaints are filed against an accused after he has been granted anticipatory/regular bail to create grounds for the cancellation of the bail.

A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed thus while dealing with a plea filed seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the accused (by the HC in August 2023) booked in a 2023 FIR lodged under Sections 493, 323, 504, 506 IPC.

Allahabad HC Dismisses Advocate's 'Vexatious' Plea To Initiate Criminal Contempt Case Against Gujarat HC Chief Justice

Case title - Arun Mishra vs. Honble Mrs Justice Sunita Agrawal, The Then Puine Judge Of This High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 591

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 591

The Allahabad High Court DISMISSED a petition filed by an advocate under Section 15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Justice Sunita Agrawal (former Judge, Allahabad HC; presently, Chief Justice, Gujarat High Court).

A bench of Justice Rajiv Gupta and Justice Surendra Singh-I termed the petition as 'frivolous', 'vexatious', 'irresponsible', 'merit-less' and 'misconceived' and added that in the interest of proper functioning of the Institution, such applications should be discouraged by all means.

NI Act | Company Can Be Summoned Through Person In-Charge Of Its Affairs, No Separate Summon To The Company Required: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Kishore Shankar Signapurkar v. State Of U.P. And Anr [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4898 of 2019]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 592

The Allahabad High Court has held that a company is juristic person can be summoned through the person in-charge of its affairs and if such a juristic person summoned through the person in-charge, it cannot be said that the company has not been summoned for trial under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The Court held that once company is also made a party to the proceedings under Section 138 and 141 of the Act, if the signing Director signing the cheque is summoned, then it must be presumed that the company has been summoned.

Prosecution Can't Rely On Dying Declaration Unless Accused Is Confronted With Its Contents: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Shahrukh Khan And Another vs. State Of UP 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 593

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 593

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the prosecution cannot rely on a dying declaration unless an accused is confronted with its contents.

A bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Dr Gautam Chowdhary observed thus while acquitting a husband and mother-in-law in connection with a dowry death case.

Summoning A Serious Affair, More So When Issued After Rejecting Closure Report: Allahabad HC Quashes Murder Case Against Doctor Couple

Case Title: Dr. Rajesh Singh And Another v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 600 of 2020 ]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 594

The Allahabad High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against a Doctor couple– who are also owners of a hospital in Rajepur–in a case where the deceased who had accompanied his mother in the hospital, was allegedly removed and later died in a road accident thereafter.

The high court passed the order while hearing a plea moved by the doctor couple against the summoning order of the magisterial court as well as the sessions court order which had rejected their revision plea against the summoning order.

False Criminal Prosecution By Wife May Create Reasonable Apprehension Regarding Personal/ Family Safety, Constitutes Cruelty: Allahabad HC

Case Title: Smt. Tripti Singh v. Ajat Shatru [FIRST APPEAL No. - 251 of 2013]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 595

The Allahabad High Court has held that false criminal prosecution case by wife against the husband and his family may create reasonable apprehension in mind of the husband regarding the safety of his family and himself if he were to stay in the matrimonial relationship.

It was held that such false criminal prosecution is sufficient to constitute cruelty under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Criminal Court Can't Deal With Allegations Of Misappropriation Of Investor's Money By Share Broker, SEBI Act Prevails: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Jitendra Kumar Keshwani v. State Of U.P. And Anr [APPLICATION under Section 482 No. - 27298 of 2019]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 596

The Allahabad High Court has held that that by virtue of Section 26 of Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, which bars Court from taking cognizance regarding offences under the Act, the Trial Court cannot take cognizance of a case where broker is alleged to have misappropriated money of the investor. It was held that the SEBI Act being a special act will override IPC and CrPC.

Advocates Can't Be Discourteous Or Use Intemperate Language Against Judges: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: In Re v. Shri Yogendra Trivedi [CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 7 of 2023]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 597

In suo moto contempt proceedings against a lawyer, the Allahabad High Court has held that Advocates, being officers of the court must be courteous towards the Judges.

Special Appeals Against Contempt Court Order Maintainable Only When Finding On Merits Of Original Dispute Is Returned: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Subhash Chandra v. Srikant Goswami Posted Managing Director, Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Ltd. Lucknow And 2 Others [Special Appeal No. 372 of 2023]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 598

The Allahabad High Court has held that Special Appeals under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 are maintainable against order of the Single Judge in Contempt jurisdiction only when the Contempt Court oversteps its jurisdiction and enters into merits of the original dispute between the parties.

The bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh sitting at Lucknow held,

“Special appeals in contempt cases are warranted only when the Contempt Court oversteps its jurisdiction by addressing the merits of the original dispute, ensuring that the substantive rights of the parties are protected. The interpretation of each case must consider the specific facts and circumstances to uphold the integrity of contempt jurisdiction and provide appropriate remedies for aggrieved parties.”

CMO, Doctors Often Not Aware Of Procedure In Medical Termination Of Pregnancy Cases: Allahabad HC Directs UP Health Secretary To Issue SOP

Case title – 'X' Respondent :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others

Case citation: : 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 599

Observing that often the Chief Medical Officers and doctors in the State of Uttar Pradesh are not aware of the procedure to be followed in cases of medical termination of pregnancy while examining the female, the Allahabad High Court has directed the Principal Secretary, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttar Pradesh to issue Standard Operating Procedure for the same which is to be followed by all Chief Medical Officers and the Boards constituted by them.

Have Transferred Amroha DM For Approving Gang-Charts Sans Recording Satisfaction: UP Govt Informs Allahabad HC

Case title - Asif vs. State Of Up And 2 Others and connected matters 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 600

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 600

The Uttar Pradesh Government informed the Allahabad High Court that it has transferred the District Magistrate of Amroha, Mr Rajesh Kumar Tyagi, from the district and attached him to the secretariat, and has not been given any field posting.

This decision came after HC flagged that the DM concerned had approved gang charts against the accused in several cases without signing the documents or recording any justification for his approval, which was contrary to the Uttar Pradesh Gangster and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021, as well as guidelines issued by the HC in the case of Sanni Mishra @ Sanjayan Kumar Mishra vs State of UP.

Second Appellate Court Cannot Interfere With Factual Finding Of Lower Courts: Allahabad High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Mahavir Prasad v. Balveer Singh And Anr. [SECOND APPEAL No. - 540 of 2024]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 601

Recently, the Allahabad High Court has reiterated that reappreciation of evidence by a Second Appellate Court is impermissible.

Justice Kshitij Shailendra held that

“…even when two views are possible, out of which one view has been taken by the courts after appreciating evidence on record, second Appellate Court would not substitute that view by its own view. Re-appreciation of evidence to arrive at a different conclusion is quite restricted in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure…”

Matrimonial Dispute Remains Between Couple, No Impleadment Can Be Allowed In Divorce Proceedings U/S 13B Hindu Marriage Act: Allahabad HC

Case Title: Smt Kriti Goyal v. Dev Suman Goyal And 3 Others [FIRST APPEAL No. - 716 of 2024]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 602

The Allahabad High Court has held that the divorce proceedings (matrimonial disputes) are only between the parties to the marriage, no third person can seek impleadment in proceedings under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The bench comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh held,

“Piquant as it may be, the impleadment sought may never be justified. A matrimonial dispute remains a dispute interse between the couple in question who may be finding difficulties in their matrimonial relationship. All other persons remain strangers to that dispute.”

Employee With Requisite Educational Qualification Eligible For Promotion Regardless Of Criteria Being Fulfilled Prior To Or During Service: Allahabad HC

Case Title: Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. And 3 Ors. [WRIT - A No. - 17005 of 2018]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 603

“….. a candidate if is already having qualification to his credit prior to entering into the service and, he is equally entitled to be considered for promotion on the post of Junior Engineer within 5% quota provided within the rules,” held Justice Ajit Kumar.

Can't Keep Accused In Jail Indefinitely; Witnesses Not Being Produced In Trial Courts In Heinous Cases: Allahabad HC Seeks UP DGP Affidavit

Case title - Manoj vs. State of U.P.

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 604

The Allahabad High Court recently expressed concerns over the prosecution's non-production of witnesses before the trial court, even in cases of heinous crime, leading to indefinite detention without trials.

The Court emphasised that a person cannot be detained for an indefinite period if the prosecution is not making sincere efforts to produce the prosecution witnesses before the trial Court.