Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: March 28 To April 3, 2022

CITATIONS 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 142 TO 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 157

NOMINAL INDEX

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

Raj Kumar and Raj Kishore v. The State 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 151

Ram Yagya And Others v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 152

Kheem Singh Bora @ Matrey @ Prakash @ Rajan @ Vijaypahru v. State Of U.P. Thru A.T.S. Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 153

Sandeep Mittal v. State of U.P. and Another and connected matter 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 154

M/S. Shree Ram Engineering Works Versus Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 155

M/s Tirupati Stationary Pvt. Ltd v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 156

State of U.P. v. Swami Sachichidanand Har Sakchhi And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 157

Judgments/Orders of the Week

1. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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).

5. 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.

6. "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

7. 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.

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

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.

9. 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.

10. "Right Of Private Defence Theory Not Acceptable" : Allahabad High Court Upholds Life Sentence In A 41 Year Old Murder Case

Case title - Raj Kumar and Raj Kishore v. The State

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 151

Rejecting the theory put up by a convict of Right To Private defence, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) UPHELD the life imprisonment awarded by the trial court to the convict/Raj Kumar (appellant no 1) in a 41-year-old murder case.

The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav however, SET ASIDE the conviction of appellant no. 2/Raj Kishore under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC in connection with the same murder case, as it noted that the prosecution had failed to prove a prior meeting of minds between appellant no. 1 (Raj Kumar)/Murder Convict and appellant no. 2 (Raj Kishore).

11. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To A Murder-Convict In Jail For 17 Years In View Of SC's Order In 'Saudan Singh' Case

Case title - Ram Yagya And Others v. State of U.P.

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 152

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 Thursday granted bail to one Hari Bhawan who has already served over a total of 17 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.

12. Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Alleged Maoist Kheem Singh Bora Booked Under UAPA By UP Police

Case title - Kheem Singh Bora @ Matrey @ Prakash @ Rajan @ Vijaypahru v. State Of U.P. Thru A.T.S. Lucknow

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 153

The Allahabad High Court DENIED bail to an alleged Maoist leader Kheem Singh Bora who was arrested by the Uttar Pradesh Anti-Terrorist Squad (ATS) in July 2019 from the Bareilly railway station.

Bora, who is carrying a reward of Rs 50,000 (as announced by Uttarakhand police in 2017), had moved to the High Court seeking bail in connection with a case registered against him under Sections 3/25 of Arms Act and 20/38 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

However, the Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal denied him bail in view of the fact that he is wanted in five criminal cases and that he is stated to be the State Secretary of the banned organization Communist Party of India (Maoist) for the State of Uttarakhand.

13. Allahabad High Court Dismisses Pleas Seeking 10% EWS Reservation Benefit In UP Higher Judicial Service Exam 2020

Case title - Sandeep Mittal v. State of U.P. and Another and connected matter

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 154

The Allahabad High Court dismissed two pleas seeking direction to the High Court administration to provide the benefit of the 10% reservation to the E.W.S. General Category candidates for Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service, 2020.

Stressing that once the advertisement is out, it would not be just and proper for the authorities to insert any new clause, the Bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Ajai Tyagi dismissed the pleas.

14. Survey Not Disputed By The Partner Of The Firm Who Was Present - Can't Question Later: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: M/S. Shree Ram Engineering Works Versus Commissioner Of Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 155

The Allahabad High Court bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal has ruled that once the partner of the firm was available at the time of the survey, who must have signed the survey report, he could very easily request to correct the entries or refuse to sign the survey report, if it was not recorded as per his statement.

The applicant/assessee is in the business of manufacturing and selling rough C.I. Castings. The business premises of the applicant were surveyed on August 18, 2010, where certain exhibits were seized. The books of account as well as an estimation of turnover were made, which was assailed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has partly allowed the appeal.

15. Condition Of Pre-Deposit U/S 19 MSME Act Mandatory, Prevails Over Exemption To Govt Under Order XXVII Rule 8A CPC: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: M/s Tirupati Stationary Pvt. Ltd v. State of U.P.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 156

The Allahabad High Court has held that the requirement of a pre-deposit under Section 19 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 ('MSME Act') would prevail over the provisions of Order XXVII Rule 8-A of Code of Civil Procedure and any other law that may allow the Courts' discretion while dealing with the requirement to pre-deposit a disputed amount in an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

16. Allahabad High Court Dismisses Revision Plea Challenging Discharge Of MP Sakshi Maharaj In Rape, Kidnapping Case

Case title - State of U.P. v. Swami Sachichidanand Har Sakchhi And Others

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (All) 157

The Allahabad High Court dismissed a revision plea filed by the State Government against the discharge order passed by Special Judge (D.A.A.), Etah in 2001 in favor of BJP MP Sakshi Maharaj in connection with a rape and kidnapping case.

The Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed upheld the discharge order by taking into account the findings of the trial court that there was no evidence of allegation of kidnapping, loot or rape against the MP Maharaj and other accused persons.

Important Weekly Updates From the High Court/UP courts

1. 'Hisab Kitab' Remark Case: Allahabad High Court Stays Arrest Of Mukhtar Ansari's Son & Mau MLA Abbas Ansari

Case title - Abbas Ansari And Another v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others

The Allahabad High Court stayed the arrest of Mau Sadar MLA Abbas Ansari, the son of jailed politician Mukhtar Ansari in connection with the Hisab-Kitab Remark case registered against him for his alleged statement threatening the government officials with payback at a public rally in Mau district earlier this month.

It may be noted that at a public rally during the election campaigning, Ansari had said that he had asked the Chief of Samajwadi Party (SP), Akhilesh Yadav not to transfer the government officials for the next six months if the SP alliance government is formed in Uttar Pradesh, as their 'Hisab Kitab' would be done first.

2. Man Calls District Judges, Officials 'The Murderers Of Indian Constitution': Allahabad HC Issues Contempt Notice

Case title - In-Re v. Vikram Sharma (Clerk)

The Allahabad High Court issued a contempt notice who wrote a letter alleging that in the District Court, all the Judges, Officers, and employees are dishonest and that they have murdered the Constitution of India.

The bench of Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma issued notice to Contemptnor [Vikram Sharma (Clerk)] while refusing to accept his unconditional apology for writing the letter stating the aforesaid in the year 2016.

Allahabad HC Directs Lucknow's DM Led Committee To Inspect City Schools Running In Residential Areas, Submit Report

Case title - Gomti River Bank Residents through Secretary Girdhar Gopal v. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Development and others

Taking a strict view of the matter of schools operating in the residential areas of Lucknow in violation of safety standards and concerned rules and regulations, the Allahabad High Court has directed a committee headed by the District Magistrate to conduct an inspection in this regard and submit a report before the Court.

The bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Alok Mathur has ordered the DM-led committee to conduct an inspection of 16 such schools in the capital and submit a report in this regard on April 18, which is the next date of hearing.