Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: March 2022 [Citations 81 To 150]

NOMINAL INDEX

Durga Datt Tripathi v. State of U.P. and Another . 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 81

Ahsan And Others v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 82

Mohd.Imran Malik v. State Of U.P And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 83

Kalicharan v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 84

Ram Audhi @ Sudhir Kumar v. State Of U.P. And Anr 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 85

In-Re v. Sri Krishna Kumar Yadav, Adv 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 86

Smt. Habiba v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 87

Alok Shukla And Another v. State Of U P And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 88

Yashpal v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 89

Akhilesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 90

Dr. Rajeev Gupta M.D. v. State Of U.P. Thru. Sp Cbi/Acb Naval Kishore 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 91

Prasiddh Narayan Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 92

Smt. Ramendri v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 93

Madhav Singh v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 94

Mohammad Niyaz v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 95

Shankar Varik @ Vikram v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 96

Monu Thakur v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 97

Ram Harsh v. Union of India and 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 98

Smt. Maya v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical Health And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 99

M/S V.K. Traders v. Union Of India And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 100

Durgawati Singh and others v. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits Lucknow and others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 101

Avneesh Kumar And 2 Others v. Union Of India And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 102

Smt. Sharma Devi v. State Of U.P. Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Food And Civil Supply Lko And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 103

Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals v. Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 104

Mohammad Azam Khan v. The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 105

State of U. P. v. Brijesh and another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 106

Jatinder Pal Singh vs M/S Statcon Power Controls Ltd 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 107

Mohammad Azam Khan v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home And Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 108

Shiv Kumar Bahadur Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Dairy Development And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 109

Bhura v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 110

Chavi Lal And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 111

Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru Addl. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 112

Om Prakash Verma v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 113

Raj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. and Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 114

Sangram Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 115

Nokhe Lal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 116

Mukis v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 117

Gamma Gaana Limited v. Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 118

Prabhat Kumar And Others vs Dheeraj And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 119

C/M Jago Rajbhar Jago Samiti And Another V. Union Of India And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 120

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Divisional Manager v. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 121

Amrita Nand @ Tribhuvan Arjariya @ Baba v. State of U.P. and Another. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 122

Upendra v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 123

Pankaj Tyagi v. State Of U.P. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 124

Smt. Rekha Gautam v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 125

Khurshidurehman S. Rehman v. State of U P and another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 126

Titu v. State Of U.P.And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 127

Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 128

Prakash @ Jai Prakash Ruhela v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 129

Sajid @ Kale v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 130

State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rahul Singh @ Govind Singh connected with Rahul Singh @ Govind Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 131

Jeetu @ Amit Kumar Rawat And Anr. v. Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar Lucknow And Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 132

Sanjay Gupta Vs. State Of U.P. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 133

Dr. Sonal Sachadev Aurora v. State Of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Prin.Secy.Medical Educat. And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 134

Smt. Kavita Sonkar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 135

Anirudh Kamal Shukla v. Union Of India Thru. Assistant Dir. Directorate Of Enforcement Lko 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 136

Bindu v. High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Through Its R.G And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 137

Dr. Syed Kalbe Sibtain @ Noori v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home. Lko And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 138

The Assembly of God North India Balrampur and another v. State of U.P. through Secy. Revenue Lko. and 3 others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 139

X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 140

Rahul Kumar In Wria 323 Of 2022 v. State Of U.P Thru.Addl.Chief Secy.Basic Edu. Dept. U.P. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 141

Gopal Krishna Shankdhar @ Krishna Gopal Shankdhar v. Shri Manoj Kumar Agarwal And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 142

Aparna Purohit v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 143

Smt. Shalinee Dubey @ Radhika Dubey v. Abhishek Tripathi @ Gopal 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 144

State Of U.P. Through Secretary Revenue And 4 Others v. State Public Service Tribunal And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 145

Anokhi Lal Second Bail v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 146

Inayat Altaf Shekh And 3 Others. v. State Of UP and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 147

Anant Mishra @ Amit Mishra @ Surya Prakash Mishra v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 148

Ram Prasad Rajouriya Vs. State Of U.P. And 5 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 149

Fareed In Jail v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 150

1. [17-Crore Fraud Case] "Abuse Of Public Office For Private Gain Has Hit Nation Badly": Allahabad HC Refuses To Quash FIR

Case title - Durga Datt Tripathi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 81

While refusing to quash criminal proceedings in connection with a fraud involving Rs. 17 Crore of public money, the Allahabad High Court recently stressed that the abuse of public office for private gain has grown in scope and scale and hit the nation badly and that corruption reduces revenue, slows down economic activity, and holds back economic growth.

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Rajiv Gupta was hearing a 482 CrPC application filed by one Durga Datt Tripathi who has been named as an accused in Rs.17.27 crores embezzlement case.

2. Benefit of Section 57IPC Not Available Merely On Ground Of Being In Jail For 18 Yrs: Allahabad HC Dismisses Murder Convicts' Appeal

Case Title - Ahsan And Others v. State of U.P.

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 82

Upholding the life imprisonment sentence of 5 convicts in connection with a 2003 murder case, the High Court observed that the benefit provided under section 57 IPC cannot be extended to the appellants merely on the ground that they are languishing in jail for about 18 years.

Having analyzed the facts and circumstances of the Case, the Bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Om Prakash VII disagreed with the argument of the counsel for the appellants that they could be released by taking recourse to the Section 57 IPC as they have already suffered 18 years of imprisonment.

3.. PM Narendra Modi's Image Shared Allegedly With A Pig's Face: Allahabad HC Denies Relief To WhatsApp Group Admin

Case title - Mohd.Imran Malik v. State Of U.P And Another

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 83

The High Court recently refused to quash a criminal case against one Mohd. Imran Malik, who is the admin of a WhatsApp group, wherein a message was shared which allegedly contained the photo of Prime Minister Narendra Modi with the face of a pig.

Not finding any 'cogent' reason to quash the case, the Bench of Justice Mohd. Aslam dismissed his 482 CrPC Application as it noted that he was a 'group admin' and also a co-extensive member of the WhatsApp group

4. Defence Of Accused Can't Be Looked Into In Writ Plea Seeking Quashing Of FIR: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Kalicharan v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 84

The High Court has observed that the defence of the accused cannot be looked into while considering the writ petition seeking quashing of the First Information Report.

The Bench Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Deepak Verma observed thus while dismissing a plea filed by one Kalicharan seeking the quashing of the impugned F.I.R. registered against him under Section 302, 120-B I.P.C.

5. Direct UP Cops To Prepare True Site Map, Take Picture Of Crime Spot With Smart Phones During Probe: Allahabad HC To DGP

Case title - Ram Audhi @ Sudhir Kumar v. State Of U.P. And Anr

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 85

The High Court recently directed the Director General of Police, U.P., to issue necessary directions to the Investigating officers regarding preparation of true site plan/map with dimensions in the correct manner and also to take photographs of the spot with smart phones.

The Bench of Justice Rajeev Singh issued this order while allowing the bail plea of a gang rape accused as it noted that in the case, site plan was prepared by the Investigating Officer in a most cursory manner.

6. Advocate Apologizes For Abusing Lady Judge In Open Court: Allahabad HC Disposes Contempt Case After Imposing 2K Cost

Case title - In-Re v. Sri Krishna Kumar Yadav, Adv

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 86

The High Court disposed of a contempt case against a lawyer who abused a lady judge in the open court after he tendered an unconditional & unqualified apology before the court/judicial officer.

The Bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan however imposed a cost of Rs. 2,000/- upon him to be deposited at the District Legal Services Authority, Mau. Further, the contemnor/advocate would be under observation with regard to his conduct and behavior for a period of two years.

7. Special Leave To Appeal U/S 378 (4) CrPC Can Be Granted Only When View Of Acquitting Judge Is Unreasonable: Allahabad HC

Case title - Smt. Habiba v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 87

The High Court observed that special leave to appeal as envisaged under Section 378(4) of the Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) could be granted by the High Court only where the view taken by acquitting judge is clearly unreasonable.

The Bench of Justice Mohd. Aslam further added that it is the duty of the court to punish the guilty person when the guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt and it is also the duty to acquit the accused when it is not so established.

8. Courts Can't Direct Govt To Have A Particular Method Of Recruitment, Eligibility Criteria For Services: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Alok Shukla And Another v. State Of U P And 2 Others

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 88

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the prescription of qualifications and other conditions of service pertains to the field of policy and is within the exclusive discretion and jurisdiction of the State and that it is not open to the Courts to direct the Government to have a particular method of recruitment or eligibility criteria.

The Bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan further opined that the selection and appointment to any post should be made strictly in accordance with terms of the advertisement and the recruitment rules.

9. [UP Excise Act] Civil Appeal Against DM's Confiscation Order Lies Before Concerned District Judge: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Yashpal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 89

The High Court has observed that as per provisions of Section 72(7) of Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910, a Civil appeal against the order of confiscation passed by the District Magistrate would lie before the District Judge of the respective District.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed thus in light of the notification issued in the year 1978 by the UP Government, wherein the appellate judicial authority appointed by the State Government is "District Judge", who has been designated to hear the appeal against the order made by the DM Concerned regarding the confiscation of a vehicle under the Act.

10. During Confiscation Proceedings Magistrate Has No Jurisdiction To Release Vehicle Seized U/S 72 UP Excise Act: Allahabad HC

Case title - Akhilesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 90

The High Court observed that during the confiscation proceedings initiated under the Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910, the Magistrate has no power under sections 451 or 457 Cr.P.C. to release the vehicle in question.

The Bench of Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi has concluded thus in view of the law laid down by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Ved Prakash vs. State of U.P. 1982 AWC 167, wherein it was held that during the confiscation proceedings u/s 72 of UP Excise Act, a Magistrate is not empowered to release the seized vehicle.

11. Corruption A Termite And Root Cause Of All Problems Like Poverty, Inequality, Illiteracy, Social Unrest, Etc: Allahabad High Court

Case Title - Dr. Rajeev Gupta M.D. v. State Of U.P. Thru. Sp Cbi/Acb Naval Kishore

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 91

The High Court recently made significant observations on the growing menace of corruption in society. It observed that it is like a termite in every system and once it enters the system, it keeps on getting bigger and bigger.

"Corruption is a termite in every system. Once it enters the system, it goes on increasing. Today, it is rampant and has become a routine. Corruption is the root cause of all the problems, such as poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, pollution, external threats, underdevelopment, inequality, social unrest. The menace has to be put into account. The offence is against society. The Court has to balance the fundamental rights of the accused to the legitimate concerns of the society at large vis-avis the investigating agency," the Court remarked

The bench of Justice Krishan Pahal averred thus while hearing the anticipatory bail plea of Dr. Rajeev Gupta M.D., who has been arraigned as an accused in a corruption case. While denying him bail, the Court also stressed that the medical practitioner should follow the oath which is administered to them at the time of convocation as provided by the Indian Medical Association.

"The medical practitioner administers an oath at the time of convocation as provided by Indian Medical Association which is an extension of Hippocratic oath taken the world over. The oath is not merely a formality. It has to be observed and followed in letter and spirit. It is on these lines that the apex medical education regulator, National Medical Commission has suggested that the Hippocratic oath be replaced by 'CHARAK SHAPATH' during the convocation ceremony for graduates in medical services," the Court averred.

12. Rights Accrued To Others Due To Delay In Approaching Court Shouldn't Be Disturbed If Delay Is Unexplained: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Prasiddh Narayan Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 92

The High Court observed that the time-barred cases should not be entertained by Courts as the rights, which have accrued to others by reason of delay in approaching the Court, cannot be allowed to be disturbed unless there is a reasonable explanation for the delay.

The Bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan observed thus as it dismissed a Writ Petition filed seeking a direction to the Government Authority to take a decision on the representation filed by the petitioner more than 12 years ago.

13. Allahabad HC Imposes ₹20K Cost On Dowry-Death Accused Who Approached Court With 'Unclean Hands' By Filing Successive Pleas

Case title - Smt. Ramendri v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 93

The High Court imposed ₹20,000 Cost on a Dowry Death Accused after noting that she misused the process of law by filing successive applications before the Court suppressing the material facts and documents and had misled the Court.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh further stressed that honesty, fairness, purity of mind should be of the highest order to approach the court, failing which the litigant should be shown the exit door at the earliest point of time.

14. Magistrate Has Duty To Ensure Fair Probe After Passing Order U/S 156 (3) CrPC: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Madhav Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 94

The High Court observed that the Magistrate cannot wash his hands of the case after passing an order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C and that it is the duty of the Magistrate to ensure that investigation is done impartially and in a fair manner.

The Bench of Justice Umesh Kumar observed thus while referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of U.P. & others, 2008 (60) ACC 689, wherein the Apex Court held thus:

"...there is an implied power in the Magistrate under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. to order registration of a criminal offence and/or to direct the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station to hold a proper investigation and take all such necessary steps that may be necessary for ensuring a proper investigation including monitoring the same."

15. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Posting Pakistan's Flag, Writing 'I Love You Pakistan' On FB

Case title - Mohammad Niyaz v. State of U.P.

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 95

The High Court granted bail to a man who has been booked under Sedition Charges (Sedition 124-A IPC) as he allegedly supported and posted Flag of Pakistan on his Facebook I.D. and thereby tried to create any social disturbance in the country.

Having heard the counsel of the petitioner/Mohammad Niyaz, the Bench of Justice Om Prakash Tripathi, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, was of the opinion that it was a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application was allowed.

16. Evidence Of Public Officer Can't Be Disbelieved Merely Because He Is A Police Officer: Allahabad High Court Denies Bail In NDPS Case

Case Title: Shankar Varik @ Vikram v. Union of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 96

"Evidence of a public officer cannot be thrown only on the ground that he is a police officer," the High Court held while denying bail to an accused allegedly involved in a case pertaining to recover of 1,025 kg ganja.

Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav discarded the argument that the arresting officials did not comply with the mandatory provisions of search and seizure under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

17. "No Worthwhile Evidence To Prove Charges": Allahabad HC Acquits Minor's Rape-Murder Accused, Sets Aside Death Sentence

Case title - Monu Thakur v. State of U.P.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 97

The High Court rejected the reference made to it to confirm the death penalty awarded to a man accused of burning a 14-year-old girl alive after committing rape upon her.

Acquitting the accused of Rape and Murder charges, the Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Sameer Jain noted that that there was no worth-while evidence on record to prove the charges against the accused-appellant.

18. Armed Forces Tribunal Act Cannot Curtail High Court's Power Of Judicial Review U/A 226: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Ram Harsh v. Union of India and 4 Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 98

The High Court made it clear that the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 cannot and does not oust the High Court's power of judicial review contained under Article 226 of the Constitution.

"The jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is extraordinary and discretionary in nature. It is also to be noted that the powers to be exercised by the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 are constitutional powers and the same cannot be excluded by legislation. The Armed Forces Tribunal Act cannot curtail the powers under the grundnorm being the constitution," a Bench of Justice Anjani Kumar Mishra and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan observed.

19. No Class-IV Employee Should Normally Be Transferred Out Of District: Allahabad High Court

Case Title - Smt. Maya v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Medical Health And Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 99

The High Court observed that no Class-IV employee should normally be transferred out of the district. The Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary made this observation while setting aside a transfer order passed against a Class IV Employee as it noted that the same was punitive in nature.

Essentially, the petitioner Smt. Maya (a Class IV Employee) was transferred by State Medical Health Department from Lucknow to Kanpur by transfer order dated July 12, 2021, on administrative grounds, however, the officer responsible for her transfer did not give any reason whatsoever for transferring her.

20. Anticipatory Bail Plea Not Maintainable In Case Of A Bailable Offence: Allahabad High Court

Case title - M/S V.K. Traders v. Union Of India And 3 Others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 100

The High Court held that an application for grant of Anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable in case of an offence that has been declared by the concerned statute as a bailable offence.

The Bench of Justice Samit Gopal further clarified that anticipatory bail does not arise for an offence that is bailable and a direction for the same can be issued only in respect of non-bailable and cognizable offences.

21. Court May Refuse Relief For Breach Of Principles Of Natural Justice Where No 'Real Prejudice' Is Caused To Affected Party: Allahabad HC Reiterates

Case Title: Durgawati Singh and others v. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies & Chits Lucknow and others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 101

The High Court, sitting in Lucknow, reiterated that a Court, in exercise of its discretion, may refuse relief in a case where there has been a breach of principles of natural justice, if it is of the opinion that no "real prejudice" is caused to the affected party.

"Natural justice is a flexible tool in the hands of the judiciary to reach out in fit cases to remedy injustice. The breach of the audi alteram partem rule cannot by itself, without more, lead to the conclusion that prejudice is thereby caused," the bench comprising Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Jaspreet Singh reiterated.

22. "Consider Candidature If Religious Tattoos Are Removed": Allahabad HC Directs Centre, Grants Relief To SSB Exam Candidates

Case title - Avneesh Kumar And 2 Others v. Union Of India And 4 Others

Case citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 102

In a relief to 3 candidates who participated in the 2018 Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) recruitment process but were denied employment on account of certain tattoos on a certain part of their hands (forearm), the High Court directed the Central Government to consider their candidature if they remove their tattoos.

The Bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma directed the Centre and the SSB that if the petitioners' tattoos are removed then that particular disability may not be considered as an obstacle for selection on the ministerial posts for which the petitioners had applied.

23. Daughter-In-Law Eligible For Allotment Of Fair Price Shop On Compassionate Grounds: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Smt. Sharma Devi v. State Of U.P. Through Its Additional Chief Secretary, Food And Civil Supply Lko And Ors

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 103

The High Court held that a daughter-in-law is very well entitled to allotment of a fair price shop on compassionate grounds.

The Bench of Justice Manish Mathur relied upon an earlier judgment of the High Court wherein it was held that a widowed daughter-in-law is eligible for allotment of a fair price shop on compassionate grounds.

Essentially, the Court was dealing with a writ plea filed by one Sharma Devi whose application for allotment of fair price shop on the compassionate ground had been rejected by the Government authority on the ground that she does not come within the definition of 'family' as described in paragraph IV(10) of the Government Order dated 5th August, 2019.

24. "Follow Natural Justice Principles Contemplated U/S 75(4) CGST/ UPGST Act": Allahabad HC Directs UP Assessing Authorities

Case title - Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals v. Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 104

The High Court has directed the Proper Officers/Assessing Authorities in the State of Uttar Pradesh to follow the principles of natural justice as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017/ U.P. Goods and Services Tax, 2017.

The Bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Jayant Banerji observed thus in a Tax Writ filed by Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals that had moved the Court after an assessment order was passed against it creating a demand of tax.

25. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To MP Azam Khan In Case Over His Alleged Remarks Against RSS, BJP

Case title - Mohammad Azam Khan v. The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 105

The High Court granted bail to the Senior Samajwadi Party leader and a Member Of Parliament, Azam Khan in connection with a case registered against him for allegedly making derogatory statements against BJP, RSS by way of misusing his official letterhead and seal as a UP Minister.

Noting that Khan has been in jail since February 2020, a charge-sheet has been submitted against him and the trial Court has taken cognizance of it, the Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha was of the view that his continued custody isn't necessary for the purpose of further investigation and trial in the instant case and therefore, he was granted bail.

26. "No Evidence That Accused Administred Poison To Deceased": Allahabad HC Upholds Trial Court's Acquittal Order In Murder Case

Case title - State of U. P. v. Brijesh and another

Case citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 106

The High Court upheld an acquittal order of a trial court in a murder case after concluding that there was not sufficient evidence to prove that the accused persons had committed the murder of the deceased by administering poison to him.

With this, the Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi rejected the application filed by the State Government seeking leave to file an appeal against the acquittal order. The appeal was also dismissed summarily at the admission stage.

27. Director Can't Be Prosecuted U/S 138 NI Act When He Is Not Involved In Day To Day Affairs Of The Company: Allahabad High Court

Case Title : Jatinder Pal Singh vs M/S Statcon Power Controls Ltd

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 107

The High Court has held that a director, who is not involved in the day to day affairs of a company, cannot be prosecuted for the offence under section 138 (Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

'It is clear from the perusal of the complaint that there is no specific averment that applicant is involved in day-to-day affairs of the company. There is only general allegation that applicant is a Director of the company. The documents filed by the applicant establishes that the applicant was a nominee Director and who has now resigned. Considering the aforesaid facts and the law propounded on the point it is clear that in absence of specific allegations about the applicant he can not be prosecuted for any offence under section 138 N.I. Act," Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi held.

28. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To MP Mohammad Azam Khan In UP Jal Nigam Recruitment Scam Case

Case title - Mohammad Azam Khan v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home And Anr.

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 108

The High Court granted bail to Senior Samajwadi Party leader and a Member Of Parliament, Mohammad Azam Khan in a case registered against him in connection with the 2016 Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam recruitment scam.

The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha noted that the State had failed to point out any clinching evidence from the charge sheet against Khan, which could show that he actively participated in the recruitment process in the U.P. Jal Nigam.

29. Precarious Financial Condition No Ground To Delay Pensionary Benefits To Superannuated Govt Employee: Allahabad HC

Case Title : Shiv Kumar Bahadur Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Dairy Development And Others

Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 109

The High Court observed that the Precarious financial condition of a corporation can not be a ground to delay payment of pensionary benefits that are due to superannuated employees.

The Bench of Justice Irshad Ali made this observation on a plea filed by one Shiv Kumar Bahadur Singh who sought direction upon the Government authorities to make payment of him a full amount of gratuity to along with interest in view of the amended provisions of Section 4 of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

30. Allahabad High Court Modifies Sentence Of Life Imprisonment Awarded To 32-Yr-Old Rape Convict To RI Of 13 Years

Case title - Bhura v. State of U.P.

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 110

The High Court modified the sentence of Life Imprisonment awarded to a 32-Year-Old Rape convict to Rigorous Imprisonment for 13 years, which the convict has already served out.

The Bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Om Prakash Tripathi ordered thus while observing that at the time of the incident, the prosecutrix was about 14 years and the convict was a 19-year-old, married man. The Court also noted that the prosecutrix married later on and is leading a peaceful married life.

31. Can't Enter Into Marshalling & Appreciation Of Evidence In Discharge Application U/S 239 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Reiterates

Case Title: Chavi Lal And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 111

The Allahabad High Court, sitting in Lucknow, reiterated that while dealing with an application for discharge under Section, the Court is required to only see whether a prima facie case is made out against the accused. Detailed inquiry is not required at this stage and the accused can be discharged when the charge is groundless.

"At the stage of charge the court is not required to consider pros and cons of the case and to hold an enquiry to find out truth. Marshalling and appreciation of evidence is not in the domain of the court at that point of time. What is required from the court is to sift and weigh the materials for the limited purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case for framing a charge against the accused has been made out," Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta observed.

32. SC Self-Immolation: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Former IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur In Abetment Of Suicide Case

Case Title: Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru Addl. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 112

The Allahabad High Court granted bail Former IPS officer Amitabh Thakur in the abetment to suicide case, in which a woman and her friend had set themselves on fire outside the Supreme Court and succumbed to burn injuries.

"Admittedly, the charge sheet is already filed and there is no averment in the counter affidavit for tampering any evidence," the bench of Justice Rajeev Singh stated.

33. [NDPS Act] Accused Claims Standing Order Not Followed In Seizure Of Over 1 Quintal Of Ganja, Allahabad High Court Grants Bail

Case title - Om Prakash Verma v. State of U.P.

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 113

The Allahabad High Court last week granted bail to a man booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) from whose possession allegedly over 1 Quintal of Ganja was recovered.

The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal granted bail to one Om Prakash Verma who claimed before the Court that the procedure laid down in the Standing Order to be followed while conducting seizure of the contraband was not followed in the instant case.

34. "Extra-Judicial Confession Not Corroborated": Allahabad High Court Upholds Acquittal Of Murder-Robbery Accused

Case title - Raj Kumar Verma v. State of U.P. and Others

Case citation:2022 LiveLaw (AB) 114

The Allahabad High Court recently upheld the acquittal of a Murder-Robbery accused as it noted that the alleged extrajudicial confession made by all the accused persons was highly unnatural and the same was not corroborated by any other evidence.

Essentially, the Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi was hearing an appeal filed by the informant of the case (US/ 372 CrPC) challenging the judgment and order of September 2021 passed by Additional Session Judge, Bijnor, acquitting the accused persons in a Murder-Robbery case.

35. Prosecution Must Stand On Own Legs, Can't Allow Suspicion To Take Place Of Proof Even In Domestic Enquiry: Allahabad HC

Case title - Sangram Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 115

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the prosecution must stand on its own legs based on its own evidence and that suspicion can't be allowed to take the place of proof even in a domestic inquiry.

The bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma observed thus as it set aside the dismissal order passed against an Uttar Pradesh police official for allegedly misbehaving with the private cook under the influence of alcohol.

36. Testimony Of Interested Witness Has To Be Examined With Extra Care And Caution, Reiterates Allahabad High Court

Case title - Nokhe Lal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 116

While stressing that during the trial of a case, the testimonies of the interested witnesses have to be examined with extra care and caution, the Allahabad High Court today dismissed an appeal filed by the informant of the case challenging the acquittal order of the trial court in an attempt to murder case.

Finding serious discrepancies in the statements of the interested witnesses in the case, the Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi upheld the October 2014 judgment and order passed by the ASJ, Mahoba acquitting two accused charged for offences under Sections 387, 307/34, 452, 323/34 and 427 IPC.

37. Section 125 CrPC Falls Within Constitutional Sweep Of Article 15 (3); It Intends To Protect Women, Children & Infirm Parents: Allahabad HC

Case title - Mukis v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 117

The Allahabad High Court observed that Section 125 Cr.P.C. is enacted for social justice and especially to protect women and children and also old and infirm parents and that this provision falls within the constitutional sweep of Article 15 (3), re-enforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India.

The Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav observed thus as it stressed that this provision gives effect to the natural and fundamental duty of a man to maintain his wife, children, and parents so long as they are unable to maintain themselves.

38. Rejection Of GST Refund Application On The Ground Of Delay Not Valid, Extension Of Limitation Applicable: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Gamma Gaana Limited Versus Union Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 118

The Allahabad High Court bench consisting of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Jayant Banerji observed that the refund application under the Goods and Service Tax (GST) cannot be rejected merely on the ground of delay.

"We find that the refund application of the petitioner could not have been rejected by the respondent merely on the ground of delay, ignoring the order of the Supreme Court," the court said.

39. 'Sympathetic View Required When Such Great Loss Of Body Part': Allahabad High Court Enhances Motor Accident Compensation To Child Who Lost One Kidney

Case Title: Prabhat Kumar And Others vs Dheeraj And Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 119

The Allahabad High Court enhanced the compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to a minor (as he then was), who lost one kidney and suffered liver damage on being hit by a motorcycle while driving a moped.

Justice Ajai Tyagi said,

"The learned tribunal has not taken sympathetic view which is required by tribunal in such matters when the child has suffered such a great loss of body part. Theories of just compensation has also been overlooked by the tribunal while adjudicating this matter, just because no disability or injury report was filed."

40. Allahabad HC Directs UP Govt To Take Decision On Representations To Include Rajbhar Community In ST List In 2 Months

Case title - C/M Jago Rajbhar Jago Samiti And Another V. Union Of India And 4 Others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 120

The Allahabad High Court directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to take a decision over the representations forward to it by the Centre seeking inclusion of the State's Rajbhar community in the list of Scheduled Tribes.

The Bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Dinesh Pathak issued this direction on a plea moved by C/M Jago Rajbhar Jago Samiti moved through Advocate Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi.

41. Motor Accident Claim: Allahabad High Court Imposes ₹5 Lakhs Cost On Insurance Co. For 'Keeping Litigation Alive' For 20 Yrs

Case title - United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Thru Its Divisional Manager v. Motor Accident Claim Tribunal

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 121

The Allahabad High Court imposed Rupees Five Lakhs on an insurance company while noting that it kept the litigation alive for almost 20 years in connection with a Motor Accident Claims case.

The Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh imposed the exemplary cost on the Insurance Company as they made the complainant (whose husband died in a motor accident in the year 1999) and her five minor children suffer beyond imagination.

42. Competency Certificate Of Child Witness Not Mandatory If It Understands Court's Questions & Answers Rationally: Allahabad HC In POCSO Case

Case Title: Amrita Nand @ Tribhuvan Arjariya @ Baba v. State of U.P. and Another.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 122

The Allahabad High Court held that the Competency Certificate of a child witness is not mandatory if the child gives rational answers to the court's questions and his testimony is unshaken, inspires confidence of the Court.

"Nowhere it is provided that certificate regarding the competency of the child witness is mandatory. If it is recorded, it is so far so good. But, if the court has put the question to understand his intellect to understand the question and if he replied the rational answer and thereafter his examination was recorded without recording the certificate regarding the competency of the witness and he was thereafter cross examined by counsel for the accused and had replied satisfactorily and given rational answer, therefore, in above circumstances not appending the certificate by the trial judge regarding the competency of the witness is of no consequence and it will not make his statement inadmissible," Justice Mohd. Aslam observed.

43. "Investigation Was Anything But Scientific": Allahabad High Court Acquits Rape-Murder Accused, Sets Aside Death Penalty

Case title - Upendra v. State of U.P.

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 123

The Allahabad High Court rejected the reference made to it to confirm the death penalty awarded to a man accused of Raping and murdering a 75-year-old woman. The Court observed that the investigation in the case had not been up to the mark.

Acquitting the accused, the Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Sameer Jain noted that in the instant case, blood and other biological material were not collected from the accused of DNA profiling as per the requirement of section 53-A CrPC.

44. Genuineness Of Allegations Can't Be Determined While Summoning Accused, Reiterates Allahabad High Court

Case title - Pankaj Tyagi v. State Of U.P. And Another

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 124

The Allahabad High Court reiterated that Genuineness or otherwise of the allegations cannot be even determined at the stage of summoning the accused.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed thus while dismissing a 482 CrPC Application filed challenging the summoning order of the Magistrate.

45. Maintenance Has To Be Awarded From Date Of Application Not From The Date Of Order: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Smt. Rekha Gautam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 125

Referring to the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha and another, (2021) 2 SCC 324, the Allahabad High Court observed that the maintenance has to be awarded from the date of application and not from the date of the order.

The Bench of Justice Samit Gopal observed thus as it opined that the order of the revisional court in granting maintenance to a lady and her minor children from the date of the order was illegal.

46. Can't Make Political Parties Liable For Failure To Fulfil Promises Made In Election Manifesto: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Khurshidurehman S. Rehman v. State of U P and another

Case Citation:2022 LiveLaw (All) 126

The Allahabad High Court observed that there is no penal provision under any statute to bring the political parties within the clutches of enforcement authorities, in case, they fail to fulfill their promises as made in the election manifesto.

The Bench of Justice Dinesh Pathak further clarified that a political party as a whole can't be made liable under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 for adopting corrupt practices of the election.

47. Order U/S 111 CrPC Must Contain Reasons Of Executive Magistrate's Satisfaction: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Titu v. State Of U.P.And 2 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 127

The Allahabad High Court explained the scope and necessary ingredients of an order drawn under Section 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by an Executive Magistrate.

48. Mere Digitally Signing On Notice Contemplated U/S 148 Income Tax Act Won't Amount To Issuance Of Notice: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Daujee Abhushan Bhandar Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India And 2 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 128

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that mere digitally signing the notice as contemplated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is not the issuance of notice and that the notice needs to be sent/dispatched to the income tax assessee through paper or electronic devices and when it is so sent, that day would be considered as the date of issuance of notice.

The Bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Jayant Banerji observed thus as it further held that the dispatch of an electronic record occurs when it enters into computer resources outside the control of the originator.

49. "Matter Pertains To National Security": Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Running Fake Lottery, Sending Money To Pakistan

Case title - Prakash @ Jai Prakash Ruhela v. State of U.P

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 129

The Allahabad High Court denied bail to a man who has been accused of running a fake lottery to dupe Indian nationals and sending the money to handlers in Pakistan.

The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal opined that even though the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act have not been initiated against the bail-applicant, prakash, however, since the matter pertains to national security and therefore, it is not a fit case for bail.

50. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Man Arrested In Connection With Alleged Recovery Of 200 KG Of Prohibited Flesh

Case title - Sajid @ Kale v. State of U.P.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 130

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to one Sajid @ Kale who was arrested in connection with an alleged recovery of 200 KG of prohibited flesh taking into account the fact that the co-accused, from whom the flesh was recovered, had been granted bail.

The Bench of Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan noted that the criminal history of the applicant had been adequately explained and the offences charged against the applicant are triable by the Magistrate. The Court also noted that he is in jail in this case since November 29, 2021, and the charge sheet had also been filed in the case.

51. "Case Not Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt": Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Sets Aside Death Penalty

Case title: State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rahul Singh @ Govind Singh connected with Rahul Singh @ Govind Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 131

The Allahabad High Court recently rejected the reference made to it to confirm the death penalty awarded to a man accused of murdering two persons (Husband-Wife) as it found that the prosecution couldn't prove charges against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav acquitted the accused as it came to the conclusion that evidence/statements of the sole eye-witness of the incident, PW-1 (daughter of the deceased husband-wife) was not credible and the same didn't inspire confidence.

52. Mandatory For The DM To Ensure That Life & Property Of Senior Citizens Are Protected: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Jeetu @ Amit Kumar Rawat And Anr. v. Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar Lucknow And Anr.

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 132

In a significant assertion, the Allahabad High Court observed that as per the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 and the rules framed by the state government thereunder, it is mandatory for the District Magistrate to ensure that the life and property of the senior citizen are protected and they are able to live with security and dignity.

The Bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia further observed that the Senior Citizen Act recognizes the vulnerable position of such citizens in the society and it intends to provide a mechanism to avoid their suffering and to ensure that the life and property of the senior citizen are secured and they are able to live in security and dignity.

53. Allahabad HC Quashes Summoning Order Against Dainik Jagran's Editor-In-Chief For An Alleged Defamatory News Item

Case title - Sanjay Gupta Vs. State Of U.P. And Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 133

The Allahabad High Court quashed a summoning order issued by a Court of the Magistrate against the Editor-In-Chief of the daily newspaper Dainik Jagran, Sanjay Gupta for publishing an alleged defamatory news item.

The Bench of Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi noted that in absence of specific allegations against the Chief Editor, the person holding the post can't be summoned.

54. Allahabad HC Pulls Up UP Govt For Terminating Woman From Services Sans Inquiry After Keeping Her Resignation Pending For 2 Yrs

Case Title - Dr. Sonal Sachadev Aurora v. State Of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Prin.Secy.Medical Educat. And Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 134

The Allahabad High Court pulled up the Uttar Pradesh for initiating a departmental inquiry and thereafter terminating the service of a woman doctor 2 years after she sent her resignation.

Quashing the termination order passed against the woman and noting that the petitioner/woman was harassed, the Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary opined that any working woman, more particularly, a mother is required to be accommodated as far as possible.

55. Court Can't Evaluate Suitability Or Desirability Of A Particular Qualification For Services: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Smt. Kavita Sonkar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 135

The Allahabad High Court observed that it is not the function of the Court to adjudge or evaluate the suitability or desirability of a particular qualification that may be prescribed for a particular service.

The Bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan observed thus while hearing a writ plea filed by one Kavita Sonkar who appeared and cleared the pre and main examination conducted by the State Public Service Commission for the post of Assistant Review Officer.

56. Prevention Of Money Laundering Act | "For Money-Launderers Jail Is The Rule And Bail Is An Exception": Allahabad High Court

Case title - Anirudh Kamal Shukla v. Union Of India Thru. Assistant Dir. Directorate Of Enforcement Lko

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 136

While rejecting the anticipatory bail application of a person booked under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the Allahabad High Court observed that for money-launderers Jail is the rule and bail is an exception.

The bench of Justice Krishan Pahal observes thus as it stressed that money Laundering as an offence is an economic threat to national interest and is committed by the white-collar offenders who are deeply rooted in society and cannot be traced out easily.

57. Advocate Needs To Be In 'Continuous Practice' For 7 Yrs On Date Of Application To Seek Appointment As District Judge: Allahabad HC

Case title - Bindu v. High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Through Its R.G And Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 137

The Allahabad High Court clarified that for seeking appointment as Judicial Officer/District Judge as per Article 233 (2) of the Constitution of India, an Advocate has to be in continuous practice for not less than 7 years [with no break in between] as on the cut-off date and at the time of appointment as District Judge.

It may be noted that Article 233 of the Constitution of India deals with the Appointment of district judges and its subclause (2) mandates that a person, not already in the service of the Union or of the State, shall only be eligible to be appointed a district judge if he has been for not less than seven years, an advocate or a pleader, and is recommended by the High Court for the appointment.

58. Allahabad HC Grants Pre Arrest Bail To Shia Leader Accused Of Ransacking Police Chowkis During Anti-CAA Protests

Case title - Dr. Syed Kalbe Sibtain @ Noori v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home. Lko And Another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 138

The Allahabad High Court granted pre-arrest bail to Shia leader Dr. Syed Kalbe Sibtain @ Noori booked under various sections of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly ransacking police chowkis during the Anti-CAA protests that took place in December 2019.

The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal granted bail to Dr. Noori in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. It may be noted that Dr. Noori is the son of a renowned scholar and cleric of the Shia Community, Kalbe Sadiq who has been awarded Padma Bhushan.

59. Property's Potential Use In Proximate Future Has To Be Seen To Determine Its Market Value U/S 47-A Indian Stamp Act: Allahabad HC

Case title - The Assembly of God North India Balrampur and another v. State of U.P. through Secy. Revenue Lko. and 3 others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 139

The Allahabad High Court observed that the market value of a property for the purpose of Section 47-A Of the Indian Stamp Act has to be determined with reference to the use to which the land is capable reasonably of being put to immediately or in the proximate future.

It may be noted that where it is found that an instrument is undervalued [which happened in the instant case], the procedure has been set forth under Section 47-A of the Act for assessing the correct stamp duty on the instrument.

60. Can't Deny Bail To A Juvenile If A Similarly Circumstanced Adult Offender Has Been Granted Bail: Allahabad High Court

Case title - X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 140

The Allahabad High Court reiterated that a Juvenile has a right to be released on bail where a similarly circumstanced adult offender has already been extended that liberty.

The Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed was of the further view that once the adult co-accused has been admitted to bail, there would be no justification to additionally test the case of the Juvenile with reference to the requirements of the proviso to sub Section (1) of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

61. Allahabad High Court (DB) Refuses To Interfere With Stay On UP Govt's Decision To Appoint 6800 Additional Assistant Teachers

Case title - Rahul Kumar In Wria 323 Of 2022 v. State Of U.P Thru.Addl.Chief Secy.Basic Edu. Dept. U.P. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Ors

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 141

The Allahabad High Court (Division Bench) refused to interfere in the Single Judge order dated Jan 27, 2022, staying 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.

With this, the bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I endorsed the decision of the Single bench order of Jan 27, 2022, wherein it was concluded that the UP 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.

62. Courts Can't Dictate Landlords In What Manner They Should Live Or Prescribe A Residential Standard For Them: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Gopal Krishna Shankdhar @ Krishna Gopal Shankdhar v. Shri Manoj Kumar Agarwal And 2 Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 142

The Allahabad High Court observed that in rent disputes, it is no concern of the Courts to dictate to the landlord how, and in what manner, he/she should live or prescribe for him/her a residential standard of their own.

Referring to the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Prativa Devi (Smt.) Vs. T.V. Krishnan 1996 (5) SCC 353, the Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal also stressed that the landlord is the best judge of his residential requirement and that there is no law that deprives the landlord of beneficial enjoyment of his/her property.

63. Tandav Web-Series Row: Allahabad High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Amazon Prime Video Head Aparna Purohit

Case title - Aparna Purohit v. State of U.P. and Another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 143

The Allahabad High Court granted final anticipatory bail to Amazon Prime Video head Aparna Purohit who is facing an FIR registered in Lucknow, for allegedly depicting Hindu gods in a bad light in the web series Tandav.

The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and consequently, came to the conclusion that the applicant deserved to be granted anticipatory bail.

64. Matrimonial Case Can't Be Transferred On Gound Of Distance/ Financial Stress If Plea U/S 24 HMA Has Already Been Allowed: Allahabad HC

Case title - Smt. Shalinee Dubey @ Radhika Dubey v. Abhishek Tripathi @ Gopal

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 144

The Allahabad High Court observed that once an application under S. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings] has been allowed and uninterrupted litigation expenses are being paid to a party to a matrimonial dispute, he/she cannot move transfer application on the ground of distance and financial stress.

The Bench of Justice Neeraj Tiwari observed thus as it took into account the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Abhilasha Gupta vs. Harimohan Gupta 2021 9 SCC 730, wherein the Apex Court had taken the view that once the application under Section 24 of Act, 1955 is allowed and the particular matrimonial dispute is at the verge of the final decision, the transfer application can't be allowed.

65. Departmental Inquiry Against Govt Servant Can't Be Made A Casual Exercise: Allahabad High Court

Case title - State Of U.P. Through Secretary Revenue And 4 Others v. State Public Service Tribunal And 4 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 145

The Allahabad High Court has said that a departmental inquiry against a government servant is not to be treated as a casual exercise and the principles of natural justice are required to be observed so as to ensure not only that justice is done but is manifestly seen to be done.

The Bench of Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava observed thus as it upheld an order of the UP State Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow setting aside the order of punishment passed by the State of UP against respondent no. 2 (deceased govt employee).

66. Long Period Of Incarceration Coupled With No Possibility To Conclude Trial In Near Future Can Be Fresh Ground For Bail: Allahabad HC

Case title - Anokhi Lal Second Bail v. State of U.P

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 146

The Allahabad High Court observed that if there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future and the accused applicant is in jail for a substantial long period then such a long period of incarceration may be considered as a fresh ground for the purpose of grant of bail.

The Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan observed thus while granting bail to one Anokhi Lal under Sections 498-A & 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act who had been in jail since April 2018.

The Court relied upon the ruling of the Apex Court in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation Criminal Appeal No. 693/2021 and Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb LL 2021 SC 56, wherein the Supreme Court had favored granting of bail to the accused taking into account their long period of incarceration.

67. "India's Unity Not Made Of Bamboo Reeds Which Will Bend To Passing Winds Of Empty Slogans": Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Sedition Accused Students

Case title - Inayat Altaf Shekh And 3 Others. v. State Of UP and Another

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 147

In a significant observation, the Allahabad High Court has stressed that the unity of India is not made of bamboo reeds that will bend to the passing winds of empty slogans, and that the foundations of our nation are more enduring.

The Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot observed thus while granting bail to 3 Kashmiri students who were arrested in October on sedition charges for allegedly raising pro-Pakistan slogans following Pakistan's victory in a T20 Cricket World Cup match against India.

Read more here: Kashmiri Students Accused Of Celebrating Pakistan's T20 Win Against India Granted Bail By Allahabad High Court

68. Can't Convict Co-Accused If Main Accused Is Acquitted After Examination Of Same Set Of Witnesses For Same Allegation: Allahabad HC

Case title: Anant Mishra @ Amit Mishra @ Surya Prakash Mishra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 148

The Allahabad High Court observed that considering the testimony of witnesses if one accused is acquitted, no criminal proceeding can be sustained against co-accused on the same set of witnesses with the same allegation/case.

The Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta observed thus as it quashed Section 364-A [Kidnapping for ransom] r/w Section 34 IPC charges against one Anant Mishra while taking into account the fact that on the basis of the testimony of same set of prosecution witnesses, the main accused in the matter were already acquitted by the court below.

69. "Values Have Gone Down; Litigants Can Go To Any Extent To Mislead Court": Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL With ₹50K Cost

Case title - Ram Prasad Rajouriya Vs. State Of U.P. And 5 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 149

"In the last 40 years, the values have gone down and now litigants can go to any extent to mislead the court. They have no respect for the truth," the Allahabad High Court recently observed while dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea with ₹50,000/- cost.

The Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir issued this order while dealing with a PIL plea filed by one Ram Prasad Rajouriya seeking action two persons alleging that they had embezzled the money of the Government meant for the development of Gram Panchayat.

70. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Murder-Convict In Jail For Over 16 Yrs In View Of SC's Order In 'Saudan Singh' Case

Case title - Fareed In Jail v. State of U.P.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 150

Taking into account the recent ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Crl.Appeal No.308/ 2022), the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday granted bail to one Fareed who has already served over a total of 16 years in jail.

The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav also took into account the recent observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of Suleman v State of Uttar Pradesh| Criminal Appeal No.491/2022.

It may be noted that while in Saudan Singh Case (supra), expressing concern about the long pendency of criminal appeals before the Allahabad High Court, the Supreme Court, on Feb 25, laid down some broad parameters that can be adopted by the High Court while granting bail.