Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: May 23 To May 29, 2022

Ram Chandra v. State 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 255

Jyoti Sikka v. State Of U.P. Thru.Legal Remembrancer Dept. Of Law And Justice Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 256

Nawab v. State of UP 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 257

Chhunna v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 258

Siddharth Varadarajan And Another v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 259

Mahendra Singh v. State of UP 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 260

Rajkaran Patel v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 261

Ram Khelawan And Another v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 262

Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd. v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 263

Anuj Kumar @ Sanjay And Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 264

Rahul v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 265

Babu Khan v. State Of U.P.And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 266

Anamika Srivastava v. Anoop Srivastava 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 267

Judgments/Orders/Reports

Complete Examination Of Private Witnesses, Both Chief & Cross, On Same Day: Allahabad HC Directs Trial Court Judges In UP

Case title - Ram Chandra v. State [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1862 of 1989]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 255

In a significant order, the High Court has directed the Sessions Courts throughout the state to make an endeavor to complete the examination of the private witnesses, both chief, and cross, on the same day, as far as possible.

The Bench of Justice Vikas Kunvar Srivastav and Justice Sunita Agarwal further directed the trial judges in the state to take up the examination of the private witnesses first, before proceeding with that of the official witnesses.

"This approach is needed to ensure fair and proper trial which is the duty of the trial Court and also to curb the menace where the private witnesses turned hostile for obvious reasons because of long adjournments, permitting an act of maneuvering," the Court added as it referred to the Apex Court's recent ruling in the case of Rajesh Yadav vs State of UP 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 137.

Former UP AAG Jyoti Sikka's Appeal Against Single Judge's Adverse Remarks: Allahabad HC Asks Her To Approach Same Judge

Case title - Jyoti Sikka v. State Of U.P. Thru.Legal Remembrancer Dept. Of Law And Justice Lucknow [SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 23 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 256

Hearing an appeal filed by Former Additional Advocate General, Uttar Pradesh Jyoti Sikka challenging an order of the Single Judge containing adverse remarks made against her, the High Court has asked her to approach "that very judge" who passed the order to seek redressal of her grievance.

The Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi further requested the single judge to decide the application, if filed, expeditiously.

Someone's Hate Consumed Gandhi's Body But Not His Love For Humanity: Allahabad HC Endorses 'Ganga-Jamuni Tehzeeb'

Case title - Nawab v. State of UP

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 257

While granting bail to an accused in connection with a criminal case over an altercation between political rivals that suddenly escalated into a violent brawl, the High Court observed that someone's hate did consume Mahatama Gandhi's body, but not his love for humanity.

"Seekers of different paths would do well to remember the Father of the Nation. The Mahatma by the example of his life and the fact of his death, reminds us that the quest of 4 all religions and the essence of an Indian's Dharma is love for fellow beings. Someone's hate consumed his body, but not his love for humanity. A bullet stilled his mortal frame but could not silence the truth in him," the Court observed.

A Close Relative Who Is A Natural Witness Of Crime Can't Be Recorded As An Interested Witness: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Chhunna v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 558 of 1996]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 258

The High Court observed that a close relative who is a natural witness, cannot be recorded as an interested witness. With this, the Court upheld the life sentence awarded to a murder convict by District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat in 1996.

Explaining the term 'interested witness', the bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Om Prakash Tripathi observed that an 'interested witness' must have some direct interest in seeing that the accused person is somehow or the other convicted either because of some animus with the accused for some other reason.

BREAKING| Allahabad HC Quashes UP Police FIR Against Siddharth Varadarajan & Ismat Ara Over "The Wire" Report On Farmer's Death During Protest

Case title - Siddharth Varadarajan And Another v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 259

The High Court quashed the FIR registered against The Wire's founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan and reporter Ismat Ara in Rampur over a report on the death of a protester in New Delhi during the farmers protest on Republic Day 2021.

The FIR was lodged under IPC sections 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505(2) (statements creating or promoting enmity between classes) for tweets of the report on Navreet Singh Dibdibiya (farm law protestor who died during the protest in Delhi) and alleging that they misled the public.

"Facts Of Case Shocking, Inhuman": Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Man Accused Of Raping His 11-Yr-Old Daughter

Case title - Mahendra Singh v. State of UP [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3056 of 2022]

Case Citation - 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 260

The High Court denied bail to a man who has been accused of raping his 11-year-old daughter. The Court noted that the victim had supported the prosecution version in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC.

Calling the facts of the case 'shocking', the Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed thus:

"The facts of the case are not only shocking but are inhuman also. Applicant who is father of the victim has committed the offence of rape with her daughter aged about 11 years and she has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC."

Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To HC Advocate Accused Of Raping Law Student

Case title - Rajkaran Patel v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48511 of 2021]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 261

The High Court denied bail to an HC advocate, who has been accused of sexually and physically assaulting a Law Student for a substantial long period.

Taking into account the allegations against Advocate-Accused Rajkaran Patel, the Bench of Justice Samit Gopal observed thus:

"The prosecutrix was junior in the office of the applicant. The allegations are against a person practising law and is a person in uniform involved in a noble profession. The office of a lawyer is not less respected than Courts of law."

"Consider Their Case For Remission": Allahabad HC To State Govt While Upholding Life Sentences In 42 Year Old Murder Case

Case title - Ram Khelawan And Another v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 674 of 1982]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 262

The High Court upheld the life sentence of two accused in connection with a murder case that dates back to the year 1980. The Court, however, directed the state government to consider their case for remission.

The Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh and Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi asked the state government to take into account their advanced age and their conduct in jail etc while considering their case for remission.

Ensure Strict Compliance With S. 14 SARFAESI Act For Giving Physical Possession Of Secured Asset To Financial Institutions: Allahabad HC To UP Govt

Case title - Asset Reconstruction Company India Ltd. v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 6529 of 2022]

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 263

The High Court has directed the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh to issue clear directions to all the concerned authorities in the State of Uttar Pradesh to strictly comply with the provisions of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

According to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the banks/financial institutions and reconstruction companies have the right to take possession of the secured asset and it is the responsibility of the concerned District Magistrate/Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to hand over the possession of such secured asset to the financial institutions with the help of the police.

SC/ST Act Offences: Plea U/S 482 CrPC Not Maintainable Against Summoning Order; Only Appeal U/S 14A(1) Maintainable: Allahabad HC

Case title - Anuj Kumar @ Sanjay And Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2763 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 264

The High Court has observed that an Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. can't be filed against a summoning order passed by a Special Judge in an SC/ST Act Offence. The Court observed thus while taking into account Section 14A(1) of the S.C./S.T. Act.

In the instant matter before the Court, an application under 482 CrPC was moved praying to quash the summoning order passed by II Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Lakhimpur Kheri against the applicant for offences u/s 323/504/506 I.P.C. & 3(1) of the SC/ST Act

"Serious Allegations Of Committing Unnatural Sex With Wife Sans Her Consent": Allahabad HC Denies Anticipatory Bail To Man

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

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 265

The High Court denied anticipatory bail to a man who has been accused of, inter alia, committing unnatural sex with his wife without her consent.

The Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery denied pre-arrest bail to one Rahul noting that there are serious allegations against him of assaulting his wife, committing cruelty upon her wife with regard to demand of dowry, committing unnatural sex with her wife without her consent.

"Quite Unnatural That A Man Would Rape Daughter-In-Law Along With Someone In Indian Culture": Allahabad HC Grants Pre Arrest Bail

Case title - Babu Khan v. State Of U.P.And Another [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3285 of 2022]

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 266

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of raping his daughter-in-law as the Court noted that it is quite unnatural that a father-in-law shall commit rape of his own daughter-in-law along with some other person in our Indian culture.

"...considering that it is quite unnatural that a father-in-law shall commit rape of his own daughter-in-law along with some other person in our Indian culture, considering that the accusation has been made falsely with the object of injuring or humiliating his reputation in the society," the bench of Justice Ajit Singh observed as it extended the benefit of anticipatory bail to accused-Babu Khan (father-in-law of the victim).

Court Not Supposed To Force Parties To Engage In Mediation Where Marriage Has Irretrievably Broken Down: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Anamika Srivastava v. Anoop Srivastava [FIRST APPEAL No. - 30 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 267

The High Court (Lucknow Bench) has observed that the Court is not supposed to act in a mechanical manner, and force the parties to engage in mediation where the marriage has irretrievably broken down.

The Bench of Justice Rakesh Srivastava and Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I further stressed that reference of the parties to mediation is not compulsorily required where the facts and circumstances of the case showcase that no purpose would be served out of such reference.

Updates from the High Court

Advocate Utters 'Ugly & Harsh' Words Before Presiding Officer-MACT: Allahabad High Court Issues Contempt Notice

Case title - State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. v. Sharad Kumar Gupta [CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 6 of 2022]

The Allahabad High Court has issued a contempt notice to an advocate who used ugly and harsh words in the court of the Presiding Officer/ District Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hardoi, in December 2021.

The Bench of Justice Arvind Kumar Mishra-I and Justice Manish Mathur found that prima facie, the act of the advocate (Sharad Kumar Gupta) scandalizes or tends to scandalize and lower the authority of the Court.

Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Mosque Dispute: Allahabad High Court's Order Copy Submitted In Mathura Court

The Allahabad High Court's May 12 order directing a local court in Mathura to decide two applications pending before it, filed in connection with the Sri Krishna Janambhumi Dispute, within 4 months, has been submitted before the Mathura Court yesterday.

The order has been submitted by Manish Yadav, one of the plaintiffs who has moved a suit before the Mathura Court seeking to shift Shahi Idgah Mosque, claiming that it is built at the birthplace of the deity, within the 13.37-acre premises of the Katra Keshav Dev temple.

"No Court Ought To Take Notice Of Strike/ Probable Strike By Advocates": Allahabad HC Seeks Explanation From Family Court Judge

Case title - Premraj Pratap Singh v. Alka Singh @ Meenu

In a significant observation, the High Court has said that no Court ought to take notice of a strike or a probable strike by the Advocates.

The Bench of Justice J. J. Munir observed thus as it sought an explanation of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Hathras who had adjourned the hearing in a divorce case acknowledging a probable strike by Advocates.

The Bench also observed that the adjournment by the Principal Judge prima facie amounted to misconduct.

"Barbaric & Inhuman Killing": Allahabad HC Denies Bail To 34 Cops Accused Of Killing 10 Sikhs In 'Fake' Encounter Treating Them As 'Terrorists'

Case title - Devendra Pandey and others v. State Of U.P. Thru. C.B.I. and connected appeals

In a significant order, the High Court (Lucknow bench) last week denied bail to 34 Cops, Constables in Pradeshik Armed Constabulary (PAC) who have been accused of killing 10 Sikh men in an alleged fake encounter in the year 1991 treating them as terrorists.

The Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Brij Raj Singh observed that the accused cops had indulged in a barbaric and inhuman killing of innocent persons by calling them, terrorists.

"Moreso, if some of the deceased were involved in anti-social activities and criminal cases were registered against them, then too procedure established by law should have been adhered to, to bring them to task and not indulging in such a barbaric and inhuman killing of the innocent persons in the name of terrorists by the appellants," the Court stressed as it listed the criminal appeal of accsued filed challenging their conviction for final hearing on July 25, 2022.

"Bail Plea Remained Pending Since 2014 Due To Counsels' Non-Cooperation": Allahabad HC Grants Bail To Man In Jail For 15 Yrs

Case title - Sandeep v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4140 of 2007]

The High Court granted bail to a Murder accused who has been in jail for over 15 years and despite the fact that his second bail plea was filed in the year 2014, the same could not be heard by the HC due to the non-cooperation/non-appearance of his counsels.

The Bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) granted bail to appellant-accused Sandeep in view of the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Saudan Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Crl.Appeal No.308/ 2022) and Suleman v State of Uttar Pradesh| Criminal Appeal No.491/2022.