Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: September 2022 [Citations 407 - 454]

Annu Tandon and three others v. State Through Railway Protection Force 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 407

Eklavya Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.P.W.D. And Anr. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 408

Peeyush Kumar Jain v. Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 409

Satakshi Mishra v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Edu. Dept. Lucknow And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 410

Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 411

Dr. B.R. Ambedker Granthalaya Evam Jan Kalyan v. State of U.P. and others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 412

Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 413

Mohd. Sarfaraz v. Mohd. Abid And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 414

Sri Bal Ganesh Pooja Mahotsav Samiti Thru. President Laxmi Niwas Tiwari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 415

Smt. Neelam Sharma And Another v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 416

Sohel Ahmad Siddiqui v. Noorul Huda English Medium School 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 417

Mahavir Polyplast Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 418

Waseem v. State of U.P. and Another alonhg with connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 419

State of U.P. v. Sarvan and connected appeals 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 420

Rajnish v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 421

Shamshad v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 422

Ratnesh Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 423

Julfikar v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 424

Pradeep Kumar Gupta v. State Of U.P. Through Secretary ( Higher Education) And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 425

Suab And 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 426

Anand Giri alias Ashok Kumar Chotiya v. State of U.P. and another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 427

Shyam Singh And Another v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 428

Manoj Saxena v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 429

Vikas Gupta Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 430

Varun Gupta Versus Union Of India 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 431

M/s. Zapdor-Ubc-Abnjv Delhi versus U.O.I. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 432

Aditya Kumar v. Union Of India Through Narcotic Control Bureau, Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 433

State of U.P. v. Mahfooz Ansari And 6 Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 434

Anil Gaur @ Sonu @ Sonu Tomar v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 435

Mohd. Aman Khan v. Union of India and others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 436

Ram Sewak v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 437

Minor Son Of Moolchand Through His Natural Guardian Grandfather Ved Prakash v. State Of U.P. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 438

State of U.P. v. Ram Autar 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 439

Dr. Meraj Ali And Another v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 440

State of U.P. v. Mukhtar Ansari 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 441

Rajiv Kumar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 442

Anurag Dubey (Second bail) v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 443

Rudra Dutt Sharma Alias Rudra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 444

Rahul Pandey v. Union Of India And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 445

State of U.P. v. Mukhtar Ansari 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 446

Ms. X Thru. Her Legal Guardian Bharat Lal v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 447

Gaya Prasad Yadav v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 448

Bundu And 13 Others v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 449

Pawan Mishra v. State of U.P. along with the connected appeal 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 450

Ambika Singh v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 451

Naval Kishor Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 452

Swami Chinmayanand Saraswati v. State Of U.P. And Anr 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 453

Sapna v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 454

JUDGMENTS/ORDERS OF THE MONTH

Rail Roko Protest | "Citizens Have Right To Protest Against Govt Policies/ Inaction In A Democracy W/O Committing An Offence": Allahabad HC Modifies Ex-MP's Sentence

Case title - Annu Tandon and three others v. State Through Railway Protection Force [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 638 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 407

Stressing that in democracy under our Constitution, people have the right to protest against Government policies/action/inaction, provided the protest does not lead to the commission of an offence by the protesters, the Allahabad High Court today modified the sentence awarded to Ex-MP Annu Tandon and others in connection with a 'Rail Roko Protest' Case.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh observed that except for detaining the train for 15 minutes, there was no damage to private and public property by the protesters and by and large, it was a peaceful and symbolic protest.

Can Order Recovery U/R 351-A Of Civil Service Regulations After Retirement Only If Pecuniary Loss Is Caused To State: Allahabad HC

Case title - Eklavya Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.P.W.D. And Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 408

The Allahabad High Court has clarified that after the retirement of a government servant, the state government is empowered under regulation Rule 351- A of the Civil Service Regulations to order the recovery from his/her pension, however, the same can be done only where it is established that some financial loss has been caused to the State.

With this, the bench of Justice Alok Mathur quashed an order of the UP Government holding the petitioner (retired Executive Engineer) guilty and awarding a punishment of deduction of 5% from his pension for a period of three years.

"No Rule To Deny Bail In Case Of Grave Economic Offence": Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Businessman Accused Of Stashing ₹196 Crore In Cash

Case title - Peeyush Kumar Jain v. Union of India [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21223 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 409

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Kanpur-based Perfume businessman, Peeyush Jain in connection with a case registered against him for allegedly stashing cash amounting to Rs. 196.57 Crores. He has been directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs.10 Lakhs and two reliable sureties each of the like amount.

The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi granted him bail as it noted that even if the allegation is one of grave economic offence, it is not a rule that bail should be denied in every case since there is no such bar created in the relevant enactment passed by the legislature nor does the bail jurisprudence provide so.

"The position of law regarding grant of bail which emerges from the judgments of the Supreme Court referred to above, is that the basic jurisprudence relating to bail in economic offences remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial. It is not advisable to categorize all economic offences into one group and deny bail on that basis. One of the circumstances to consider the gravity of the offence is the term of sentence that is prescribed for the offence the accused is alleged to have committed," the Court remarked.

'Maternity Act' Doesn't Provide For Time Difference Between 1st & 2nd Child For Grant Of Maternity Benefits: Allahabad HC Grants Relief To Woman

Case title - Satakshi Mishra v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Edu. Dept. Lucknow And 4 Others [WRIT - A No. - 5114 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 410

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 Act does not contain any such stipulation regarding the time difference between the first and second child for the grant of maternity benefits. A

With this, the Court granted relief to an Inter College lecturer whose application for maternity leave had been rejected by placing reliance on Rule 153(1) of the Financial Handbook by contending that the same contains a restriction that the second maternity leave cannot be granted where there is a difference of less than two years between the end of the first maternity leave and grant of second maternity leave.

Gangster Act Case| Allahabad HC Grants Bail To 'Int'l Hindu Leader' Who Allegedly Misused CM Yogi's Popularity To Cheat Public At Large

Case title - Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9799 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 411

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a self-styled international Hindu Leader and Yogi Sena Pramukh, Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu in a Gangster Act Case.

The prosecution under the Gangster Act had been launched against Sharma on the basis of a criminal case registered against him for allegedly misusing the popularity of the present Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, and fooling various persons to deposit money in bank accounts run by him.

"Only Parliament Can Include A Caste In The SC List": Allahabad HC Quashes UP Govt Orders Notifying 17 OBCs As Scheduled Castes

Case title - Dr. B.R. Ambedker Granthalaya Evam Jan Kalyan v. State of U.P. and others [PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2129 of 2017]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 412

In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court has quashed the orders of the Uttar Pradesh Government recognizing or acknowledging 17 Other Backward Classes sub-castes as Scheduled Castes. The Court said that this exercise could have been undertaken only by way of parliamentary law.

"The provisions of Article 341 of the Constitution do not leave any scope for including any Caste or Group to the list of Scheduled Caste in a State provided by the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, except by law made by Parliament," the Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir held.

Accused Can't Seek Trial Court's Direction To Prosecuting Agency To Collect A Particular Piece Of Evidence: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Amitabh Thakur v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5954 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 413

The Allahabad High Court has observed that an accused cannot ask the trial Court for a direction to the prosecuting agency that a shred of particular evidence is collected which may be in his favor.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh dismissed a petition moved by Former IPS Officer Amitabh Thakur, who had sought the preservation of the Call Detail Records (CDR) of the then Additional Chief Secretary Home, DGP, ADG Women's Cell, Police Commissioner Lucknow along with other police officials.

Mindset Developed Among Public To Overawe Judges By Complaining & Maligning Them On Baseless Allegations: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Mohd. Sarfaraz v. Mohd. Abid And 3 Others [TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 528 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 414

While dismissing a plea filed seeking transfer of a civil case to another court, the Allahabad High Court remarked that a mindset has developed among the general public to overawe Judges by complaining and maligning them on baseless allegations.

The petitioner, Mohd. Sarfaraz had sought the transfer of the case from the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Nagina, District - Bijnore to any other Court of competent jurisdiction in the Judgeship of Bijnore by leveling allegations against the Presiding Officer, Civil Judge (Jr. Division).

[Ganesh Chaturthi] Authorities Must Maintain Tranquility So That Religious Rituals Are Observed Freely: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Sri Bal Ganesh Pooja Mahotsav Samiti Thru. President Laxmi Niwas Tiwari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 5854 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 415

In a significant observation, the Allahabad High Court has said that the administrative authorities cannot absolve themselves of the responsibility for law and order and maintaining tranquility to ensure that the religious practices and rituals are observed freely and without any invasion of public tranquility.

The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Om Prakash Shukla further remarked that administrative authorities are required to blend their decision and not be indifferent to the people of faith.

With this, the Court disposed of a plea seeking a writ of mandamus to the Shravasti District Administration to allow the representation filed by the petitioner [Sri Bal Ganesh Pooja Mahotsav Samiti] seeking permission to celebrate Ganesh Chaturthi between August 31 to September 6 and to allow idol immersion.

Certificate Issued By Arya Samaj Alone Doesn't Prove Marriage: Allahabad HC Takes Dim View Of Its Way Of Organising Marriages

Case title - Smt. Neelam Sharma And Another v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others [HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 635 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 416

The Allahabad High Court recently took a dim view of the way Arya Samaj organizes marriages as it observed that the 'Samaj' has misused their beliefs in organizing the marriages without even considering the genuineness of documents.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery further held that the certificate issued by Arya Samaj alone doesn't prove the legality of a marriage. With this, the Court dismissed a Habeas Corpus Plea filed by the husband to regain his wife.

Non-Availability Of Original Agreement Is Not Material When The Parties Do Not Dispute The Existence Of The Agreement: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Sohel Ahmad Siddiqui v. Noorul Huda English Medium School, Matters Under Article 227 No. 5252 of 2022

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 417

The Allahabad High Court has held that an application under Section 8 of the A&C Act cannot be rejected merely because the original agreement or its certified copy was not on record when the parties do not dispute the existence of the agreement.

The Bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai held that a joint reading of Section 8 with Section 7(4) of the A&C Act leads to the conclusion that requirement of filing the original agreement or its certified copy as provided under Section 8(2) is not a mandatory requirement and the judicial authority shall decide the application if the existence of the arbitration agreement is alleged by one party and not denied by the other.

GST Dept. Can Only Seize Goods In Transit And Not From Godown : Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Mahavir Polyplast Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 418

The Allahabad High Court has held that the goods lying in the gowndown cannot be seized by invoking section 129 of the CGST Act. The power of seizure can be exercised only in the case of goods in transit and not for goods lying in godown.

The single bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh has observed that it is unbelievable that two (not one) authorities of the Mobile Squad of the Commercial Tax Department chose to act with negligence. The provision of Section 129(3) of the CGST Act could not be invoked to subject a godown premises to a search and seizure operation. The department was unmindful of the Act as no action was taken under Section 67. Section 67 of the CGST relates to the existence of "reasons to believe" that premise is subject to search and seizure of goods or documents found therein.

UP Govt Takes A Slew Of Decisions To Reform, Improve Investigation System, Assures Allahabad HC Of Implementing Them In 2 Months

Case title - Waseem v. State of U.P. and Another alonhg with connected matters

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 419

The Uttar Pradesh Government has informed the Allahabad High Court that it has taken some significant decisions to improve and reform the police investigation system. The decision was taken in a meeting convened on August 26, 2022, under the Chairmanship of Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of Uttar Pradesh.

The government has also assured the High Court that the decision taken by the State Government shall be effectively implemented as expeditiously as possible not later than two months and that certain other steps shall also be taken which are needed for a fair investigation.

"He Slayed 6 Lives To Quench His Thirst": Allahabad High Court Confirms Death Penalty Awarded To Man Who Killed Wife, Own Children

Case title - State of U.P. v. Sarvan and connected appeals

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 420

The Allahabad High Court confirmed the death penalty awarded to a man who committed the murder of his wife and children on account of an illicit relationship with his bhabhi (sister-in-law) in the year 2009.

The bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav concluded that in view of the manner in which offence was committed and also the magnitude of the crime, it could be placed under the category of anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime.

With this, the Court concurred with the finding of the Trial Court that the convict had killed six persons in the most brutal, grotesque, diabolical, and dastardly manner arousing indignation and abhorrence of society which calls for exemplary punishment.

"Constitutional Promise Denied": Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Murder Accused Who Spent 11 Yrs In Jail For Want Of Legal Aid

Case title - Rajnish v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20805 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 421

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a murder accused who spent more than 11 years in Jail as he could not get access to legal aid to move his bail application before the Court.

While granting him bail, the bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot observed thus:

"This is the first bail application which has been moved by the applicant before this Court. The applicant belongs to the bottom heap of humanity and unfortunately forgotten class of citizens. He did not have the resources to engage a counsel nor was he given to access to legal aid for these long years. The constitutional promise of securing justice has been denied to him. This appears to be a systemic failure."

Weapon's Recovery From A Place Unknown To Everyone Underlines Confirmation Theory U/S 27 IEA: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Shamshad v. State of U.P [JAIL APPEAL No. - 2994 of 2010]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 422

The Allahabad High Court has observed that recovery of an article/weapon from a place hitherto unknown to anybody else including the investigating officer, is a fact that underlines the confirmation theory which is at the heart of provisions of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Jyotsna Sharma observed thus as it affirmed the conviction of a murder accused who had murdered his pregnant step-mother along with her three kids i.e., his step-siblings.

The Court also took into account the fact that the accused had himself retrieved a blood-stained axe, hidden inside the bushes in the presence of the police and a witness [PW9-Ishrar] on the next of the incident and the same was an admissible piece of evidence under section 27 of Indian Evidence Act.

"Personal Interest Pleas Shouldn't Be Entertained": Allahabad High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking SIT Probe Against 2 Govt Officers

Case title - Ratnesh Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others [PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 523 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 423

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking a CBI probe and SIT inquiry against two government officers in the Public Works Department alleging that they had earned hundreds of crores by misuse of their position.

The bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Shree Prakash Singh observed that the petitioner had not disclosed his credentials and it appeared that he was acting at the instance of someone else.

Allahabad High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Man Accused Of Subjecting Minor To Forced Circumcision For Conversion Purposes

Case title - Julfikar v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7968 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 424

The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail to one Julfikar who has been accused of subjecting a 9-year-old boy to forced circumcision for religious conversion purposes.

The bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta ordered that in the event of arrest of the applicant (Julfikar), he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of the police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court.

As per the FIR, accessed by Live Law, Ghaziabad police received a piece of information through social media against the applicant with the allegation that he had converted the religion of the 9-Year-Old boy by adopting the correct procedure i.e. writing 'godnama' on a stamp of Rs. 50/- and by cutting the exterior part of the penis by a sharp-edged weapon.

The accused was booked under Section 323, 326, 120-B IPC, Section 75/80 of the Juvenile Justice Act, and Section 3/5 of U.P. Law Against Religion Prohibition of Conversion Act.

'Divyang' Man Forced To Ride Bicycle In Govt Job Interview | "State Failed Its Special Citizen": Allahabad HC Orders ₹5 Lakh Compensation

Case title - Pradeep Kumar Gupta v. State Of U.P. Through Secretary ( Higher Education) And 4 Others [WRIT - A No. - 18302 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 425

In a significant order affirming the importance of human dignity, the Allahabad High Court granted Rs. 5 Lakh compensation to a differently abled person (divyang) who was forced to ride a bicycle during an interview for an appointment on the post of Library Peon at a Government Degree College.

"The amount of compensation has been awarded to let the petitioner know, the State may take time to hear & understand its citizen and his plight but, it is neither deaf nor heartless as may ever remain indifferent, forcing him to drag his feet, almost literally, to this Court to seek justice. The citizen works at the heart of the giant being the State is. Unless the heart beats freely, the being cannot thrive," the bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh remarked as it partly allowed the plea filed by 'Divyang' man Pradeep Kumar Gupta.

Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash Chargesheet Against Anti-CAA Protestors Accused Of Pelting Stones At Police Personnel

Case title - Suab And 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23361 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 426

The Allahabad High Court refused to quash the Chargesheet filed against 5 men including an engineer by profession, accusing them of pelting stones at police personnel in Bijnor district during the anti-CAA protests in 2019.

The bench of Justice Samir Jain noted that despite the fact that during the relevant time, section 144 Cr.P.C. had already been invoked in the city, a mob, which allegedly included the applicants, gathered and pelted stones at the police personnel, due to which a constable got injured.

Therefore, the Court held, that since the FIR prima facie disclosed cognizable offences against the applicants, the charge sheet pending against the applicants cannot be quashed.

Akhil Bhartiya Akhada Parishad President Mahant Narendra Giri's Death By Suicide: Allahabad HC Denies Bail To Disciple Anand Giri

Case title - Anand Giri alias Ashok Kumar Chotiya v. State of U.P. and another [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 51323 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 427

The Allahabad High Court has rejected the bail application filed by Anand Giri, the prime accused in the alleged suicidal death of Mahant Narendra Giri who was the President of Akhil Bhartiya Akhada Parishad as well as the Mahant/Head of Shri Math "Baghambari Gaddi", Allahpur, Prayagraj and "Shri Bade/Lete Hanuman Ji Temple", Prayagraj.

The Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed that the materials collected by the C.B.I. during the investigation indicated that on account of the acts of Anand Giri (booked for abetting suicide) and coaccused, the deceased was put under tremendous pressure to die by suicide.

NHAI Is The Best Judge To Decide Which Land Would Be Suitable For Highway Construction: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Shyam Singh And Another v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 17591 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 428

The Allahabad High Court observed that the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) is the best judge to decide which land would be suitable for the construction of the Highways and that no project can be stopped at the behest of one person who thinks that his land is not important for the widening of National Highway.

The bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Jyotsna Sharma observed that while dealing with a writ petition filed by the petitioners [Shyam Singh And Another] praying that their land should not be acquired for the construction of the National Highway.

Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Accused As Parents Of 8 Y/O Sexual Assault Victim Refuse To Get Her Medically Examined

Case title - Manoj Saxena v. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27038 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 429

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to an accused booked for committing an Aggravated Sexual Assault (punishable under Section 10 of the POCSO Act) upon a 8 year old girl as her parents refused to get her medically examined.

The bench of Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) granted bail to accused Manoj Saxena taking into account the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the Apex Court's dictum in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another (2018) 2 SCC 22

PCIT Failed To Recorded Satisfaction Under His Signature Prior To Issuance Of Reassessment Notice By AO: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Vikas Gupta Versus Union Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 430

The Allahabad High Court has held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) has not recorded satisfaction under his signature prior to the issuance of a reassessment notice by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

The division bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Chandra Kumar Rai has observed that subsequent to the issuance of the reassessment notice by the Assessing Officer, the satisfaction under section 151 was digitally signed by the Prescribed Authority. Therefore, at the point of time when the Assessing Officer issued notices, he had no jurisdiction to issue the reassessment notices. Consequently, the notices issued by the Assessing Officer under section 148 were without jurisdiction.

GST Dept. Made Attachment Without Recording Opinion And Referring To Any Tangible Material: Allahabad High Court Imposes Cost

Case Title: Varun Gupta Versus Union Of India

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 431

The Allahabad High Court has held that the department has neither recorded the opinion nor referred to any tangible material which necessitated him to pass the provisional attachment order to protect the interest of the government revenue.

The division bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Jayant Banerji has directed the department to pay the cost of Rs. 50,000 to the petitioner/assessee.

Participation In Arbitral Proceedings Without Protest, In Absence Of Agreement On Seat; Venue Is Also The Seat Of Arbitration: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: M/s. Zapdor-Ubc-Abnjv Delhi versus U.O.I.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 432

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that where the parties have failed to specifically mention the seat of arbitration and have participated in the arbitral proceedings at a place without any protest, the parties shall be said to have determined, by their conduct, the said venue of arbitral proceedings as also the seat of arbitration. Hence, the courts at the said place would have exclusive jurisdiction to supervise the arbitral proceedings.

The Single Bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra held that an order rejecting an application seeking return of the application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) involves no adjudication under Section 34 and hence, the same is not appealable under Section 37 of the A&C Act; therefore, a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against the said order.

Railway Police Force Constables Not Independent Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To NDPS Act Accused

Case title - Aditya Kumar v. Union Of India Through Narcotic Control Bureau, Lucknow [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42918 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 433

The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to an accused under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act as it noted that the constables of the Railway Police Force, who witnessed the alleged recovery, search, and seizure, cannot be said to be independent witnesses.

The bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed that although the search and seizure were conducted at a Railway Station, there was no independent witness to the alleged recovery as the constables of the Railway Police Force cannot be said to be independent witnesses.

Huge Time Gap Between The Point When Accused-Deceased Seen Together & Time Of Death: Allahabad HC Upholds Acquittal Of 7 Murder Accused

Case title - State of U.P. v. Mahfooz Ansari And 6 Ors. [GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 316 of 2019]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 434

The Allahabad High Court upheld the acquittal of 7 murder accused in view of the fact that there was an enormous time gap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were last seen alive together and when the deceased was found dead.

The bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Vikas Budhwar further took into account that there were material contradictions and inconsistencies in the statement of the eyewitness, there was a delay in lodging of the FIR, followed by the fact that CDR details did not match or mark the presence of accused with the deceased.

Right To File Bail Plea Sans Delay & Access To Legal Aid 'Intertwined': Allahabad HC Suggests Positive Measures For Undertrial Prisoners

Case title - Anil Gaur @ Sonu @ Sonu Tomar v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16961 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 435

Emphasizing that the rights to file a bail without delay and access to legal aid of an eligible prisoner are intertwined, the Allahabad High Court suggested some significant positive measures so as to overcome the delay in filing of bail pleas by undertrial prisoners in absence of proper legal aid.

"The right of moving a bail application becomes illusory and personal liberty remains a distant dream if the right to legal aid of an entitled prisoner is not effectuated," the Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot observed as it directed the State Legal Services Authority to devise a scheme for such undertrial prisoners who are unable to filed bail pleas due to lack of proper access to legal aid.

Anti-CAA Protests At AMU | Students Shouldn't Indulge In Such Activities Which Bring Bad Name To Great Educational Institutions: Allahabad HC

Case title - Mohd. Aman Khan v. Union of India and others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26085 of 2019]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 436

"The students take admissions in Universities or any educational Institution for the purpose of education and not indulge in these kind of activities, which brings bad name to the great educational Institutions," remarked the Allahabad High Court as it dismissed a bunch of pleas raising issues pertaining to certain incidents (during the Anti-CAA Protest) which took place in Aligarh Muslim University in December 2019.

The bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir dismissed the pleas as it took into account an inquiry report of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) submitted pursuant to the HC's directions, recommendations made therein, and the state government's response to it.

"Crime Against Minor Girl Can Disturb Public Order Even If Committed In A Secluded Place": Allahabad HC Upholds NSA Detention Order in Rape-Murder Case

Case title - Ram Sewak v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Ors. [HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 30758 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 437

The Allahabad High Court upheld an order of the District Magistrate passed against a rape-murder accused under Section 3 (2) of the National Security Act, 1980 as it noted that crimes against minor girls create a sensation in the locality and it is bound to disturb public order.

With this, the bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav dismissed a habeas corpus plea filed by the accused (Ram Sewak) challenging the detention order passed against him by the DM under the National Security Act, 1980.

[JJ Act] Social Investigation Reports Usually Prepared Without Proper Research, Can't Place Much Reliance On Them: Allahabad HC

Case title - Minor Son Of Moolchand Through His Natural Guardian Grandfather Ved Prakash v. State Of U.P. And Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2126 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 438

The Allahabad High Court observed that while denying or granting bail to a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice Act, much reliance can not be placed upon a social background or a social investigation report as they are usually prepared without proper research.

"...a social background or a social investigation report may have a very limited purpose to serve. The findings cannot be solely based on such reports, which are more than often very superficial and unscientific. It is common knowledge that social investigation reports are usually prepared in printed formats without proper research. In my opinion, not much reliance can be placed on such half-baked reports," the bench of Justice Jyotsna Sharma remarked as it denied bail to a juvenile accused of committing murder while he was just over 13 years old.

Can't Impose Inadequate Sentence On Account Of Lapse Of Sufficient Time: Allahabad HC Awards Life Imprisonment In A 1982 Murder Case

Case title - State of U.P. v. Ram Autar [GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2683 of 1983]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 439

Allowing a government appeal, the Allahabad High Court awarded life imprisonment to a man who had committed a murder in the year 1982. With this, the High Court set aside the acquittal order passed in favor of the accused by the Special Judge, Fatehpur in the year 1983.

The Bench of Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Vikas Budhwar emphasized that merely after a lapse of sufficient time coupled with other factors, namely, the age of the accused and his resettlement, if any post acquittal by the trial court, cannot be a ground to bestow any benefit so as to wipe away the aftermath of commission of the crime.

Speedy Trial Is A Right Not Only Of Complainant But Accused Also: Allahabad High Court Quashes A 24-Year-Old Criminal Case

Case title - Dr. Meraj Ali And Another v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11924 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 440

The Allahabad High Court quashed a 24-year-old criminal case as it stressed that a speedy trial is an integral part of the fundamental right to life and liberty enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery also expressed its anguish that unnecessary and baseless criminal proceedings are pending for the last many years, as it noted that in the instant case, the criminal proceedings are pending 9 since 1998, i.e., for about 24 years and it has reached only up to the stage of discharge application.

Allahabad High Court Sentences Mukhtar Ansari To 7-Year-Jail For Abusing, Intimidating And Threatening A Jailer For His Life In 2003

Case title - State of U.P. v. Mukhtar Ansari [GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 780 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 441

The Allahabad High Court sentenced former UP MLA Mukhtar Ansari to 7 years in jail after holding him guilty of intimidating a Jailer who was performing public duty by abusing him and pointing a revolver/pistol toward him, and threatening to kill him in the year 2003

With this, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh set aside the acquittal order passed in favor of Ansari by the Special Judge, M.P./M.L.A., Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow in the year 2020 as it noted that the approach of the trial Court in evaluating the evidence before it was palpably erroneous.

"If Husband/Accused Is Convicted Then Victim/Wife's Future Would Be Ruined" : Allahabad High Court Quashes POCSO Case

Case title - Rajiv Kumar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [APPLICATION 482 No. - 4392 of 2016]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 442

The Allahabad High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings in a POCSO case registered against a man as it noted that the accused man and victim-wife (who was a minor at the time of the incident) married the applicant/accused out of her own sweet will and is living a happy married life with him.

"To punish the offenders for a crime, involved in the present case, is in the interest of society, but, at the same time, the husband is taking care of his wife and in case, the husband is convicted and sentenced for societal interest, then, the wife will be in great trouble and their future would be ruined. It is also in the interest of society to settle and resettle the family for their welfare," the bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan observed as it quashed the rape-POCSO case against the accused.

Second Anticipatory Bail Plea Maintainable If Reason For Rejection Of First Bail Plea Has Been Washed Off: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Anurag Dubey (Second bail) v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1327 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 443

The Allahabad High Court observed that the second anticipatory bail application may be considered by the Court if the reason for rejecting the first bail application has been washed off.

With this, the bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan granted anticipatory bail to one Anurag Dubey who has been booked under Sections 147, 148, 149 & 307 IPC. His first bail plea had been rejected by the Court in view of the fact that a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued against him declaring him an absconder.

Sorry State Of Affairs That Session Courts Reject Bail Pleas In Petty Issues In A Routine Manner: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Rudra Dutt Sharma Alias Rudra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8819 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 444

The Allahabad High Court disapproved of the approach of the sessions court in rejecting the bail application without application of judicial mind and in a routine manner in petty issues.

The bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta observed that it is a very sorry state of affairs that in petty issues bail applications, the session courts deny bail to the accused, prompting them to move to the High Court for relief.

"Taking Exam A Fundamental Right Under Art. 21": Allahabad HC Permits 80% Handicapped Candidate To Take Attendant To Rly Exam Centre

Case title - Rahul Pandey v. Union Of India And 3 Others [WRIT - A No. - 14614 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 445

Stressing that appearing in the examination is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Allahabad High Court permitted a railway exam candidate (who is 80% handicapped) to take an attendant to the examination centre.

The bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan allowed the writ plea of the candidate (Rahul Pandey) by directing the competent Railway Authorities to allow him to carry one attendant, who would take him to the examination centre and to the examination room.

Allahabad High Court Sentences Mukhtar Ansari To 5-Year Jail Under Gangsters Act In A 23-Year-Old Case

Case title - State of U.P. v. Mukhtar Ansari [GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 779 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 446

The Allahabad High Court sentenced former UP MLA Mukhtar Ansari to 5 years in jail in connection with a 23-year-old case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

With this, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh set aside a 2020 order passed by the MP-MLA court acquitting Ansari of charges under the Gangsters Act in a case that was registered against him in the year 1999.

Allahabad High Court Directs DLSA To Take Requisite Steps For Payment Of Compensation To A 12-Year-Old Rape Survivor

Case title - Ms. X Thru. Her Legal Guardian Bharat Lal v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others [WRIT - C No. - 6102 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 447

The Allahabad High Court directed the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Bahraich to take requisite steps to provide compensation to a 12-year-old Rape survivor whose unwanted pregnancy was terminated earlier this month as per HC's order.

The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Om Prakash Shukla has further asked the Secretary, DLSA to take up the matter with the district authorities and submit a report to the Senior Registrar of thE Court as to the outcome of such efforts taken for the payment of compensation to the victim or her family as per the prevailing scheme i.e. U.P. Victim Compensation Scheme, 2014.

Only Governor Can Take Action Under Art. 351 Of CSR If Govt Servant Is Found Guilty Of Grave Misconduct After Retirement: Allahabad HC

Case title - Gaya Prasad Yadav v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Anther [SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 408 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 448

The Allahabad High Court has held that after the retirement of a government servant, if such employee is found to be guilty of grave misconduct or is found to have caused pecuniary loss to the Government, it is the Governor who can take action as provided in Article 351-A of the Civil Service Regulations.

With this, the Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Shree Prakash Singh held that the penalty of dismissal cannot be imposed on an officer/employee after his retirement after attaining the age of superannuation, however, withholding or withdrawing a pension and ordering the recovery from the pension is permissible and that too, by an order of the Governor as per the Article 351-A of the CSR.

Victim Has No Right To Drop Case Of Non-Compoundable Offence Of Serious & Heinous Nature: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Bundu And 13 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 449

The Allahabad High Court observed that a victim has no right in law to drop the case of a non-compoundable offence of serious and heinous nature which badly affects society.

The bench Justice Sameer Jain that such cases become a matter between the State and the accused and it is the duty of the State to ensure the law and order and to prosecute the offender in such cases.

Previous Statement Of Deceased Admissible U/S 32 (1) Evidence Act If It Relates To Cause Of Death; Expectation Of Death Not Necessary: Allahabad HC

Case title - Pawan Mishra v. State of U.P. along with the connected appeal

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 450

The Allahabad High Court has observed that in the event of the death of the victim, the statement made by her/his to any living person becomes relevant and admissible in evidence under Section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act if the same relates to cause of her/his death.

The bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma further clarified that under Indian Law, it is not necessary that the person who made any declaration was actually expecting an assault that would kill him

Acquittal Finding Can't Be Converted Into One Of Conviction In Exercise Of HC's Revisional Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Ambika Singh v. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION DEFECTIVE No. - 8 of 2010]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 451

The Allahabad High Court has observed that a finding of acquittal recorded by the subordinate court cannot be converted into conviction by High Court in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction under section 401 (3) CrPC.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Lavania further stressed that a revisional court has no jurisdiction to set aside the findings of facts recorded by the Magistrate and impose and substitute its own findings.

"Sections 397 to 401 Cr.P.C. confer only limited power on the revisional court to the extent of satisfying the legality, propriety or regularity of the proceedings or orders of the lower court and not to act like appellate court for other purposes including the recording of new findings of fact on the fresh appraisal of evidence," the Court remarked.

'Bajrangbali-Dalit' Remark | Addressing A Public Meeting Different From Holding A Press Conference: Allahabad HC Grants Relief To CM Yogi

Case title - Naval Kishor Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 452

The Allahabad High Court today dismissed a plea seeking registration of a complaint against Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath for his alleged 'objectional speech' delivered during an election campaign in Rajasthan's Alwar district in the year 2018.

CM Yogi Adityanath had allegedly said that "(Hindu God) Hanuman Ji was a forest dweller, deprived and a Dalit. Bajrang Bali worked to connect all Indian communities together, from north to south and east to west"

The bench of Justice Samit Gopal observed that the object of holding a general public meeting during elections is to address the gathering present there so as to imbibe a thought in them for supporting the said political party.

"Conveying a press conference and/or giving an interview to the press is a totally different act than addressing a general public meeting in elections. A person holding a press conference and a person giving an interview to the press has a clear intention and message to the persons present that his speech or lecture or answers be published in newspaper and magazines. Addressing a general public meeting during elections for the purposes of canvassing elections is a totally different act with a different intention and object. The same is to address the gathering present at the spot so as to imbibe a thought in them for supporting the said political party," the bench remarked.

Allahabad High Court Upholds Rejection Of State's Plea To Withdraw Rape Case Against Swami Chinmayanand, Slams UP Govt

Case title - Swami Chinmayanand Saraswati v. State Of U.P. And Anr [APPLICATION 482 No. - 23160 of 2018]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 453

The Allahabad High Court upheld the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur declining to accord permission to an application of the state, forwarded by the Prosecuting Officer under section 321 Cr.P.C. seeking withdrawal of a rape case against former Union minister Chinmayanand Saraswati.

The bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi also slammed the Uttar Pradesh Government for its decision to withdraw a case against Saraswati as it remarked that the District Magistrate, Shahjahanpur had failed to spell out even a single good reason for the withdrawal of the prosecution against the accused.

"Unbecoming Of A Fair Litigant": Allahabad High Court Censures Woman Who Protested In Courtroom Against Grant Of Bail To Accused

Case title - Sapna v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24592 of 2020]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 454

The Allahabad High Court censured the conduct of a woman who protested in the courtroom against the grant of bail to an accused. Noting that she was purportedly from the informant's side, the bench of Justice Siddharth called her conduct to be unbecoming of a fair litigant.

Essentially, when the Court granted bail to accused Sapna, a woman, who was standing in court room protested in loud voice and was taken out forcibly by the lawyers and litigants. Not just that, she created lots of disturbance outside the court as well, the Court noted.