Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 17 To October 23, 2022

Amarjeet v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Lko. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 466

Flipkart Internet Private Limited v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 467

State of U.P. v. Govind Pasi along with a connected appeal 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 468

Sujit & Ors. v. State & Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 469

Naresh Kumar Valmiki v. State of U.P. and others along with connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 470

Sanjeev @ Kallu Sethiya v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 471

Sandeep Kumar And Another v. State Of U.P. And 9 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 472

Lal Bihari Yadav v. Chairman/Sabhapati U.P. Legislative Council Vidhan Bhawan Lko & another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 473

ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK

Allahabad High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail To Rape Accused Till Completion Of Probe As He Marries Victim

Case title – Amarjeet v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Lko. And 4 Others [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1687 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 466

The Allahabad High Court has granted pre-arrest bail to a Rape accused till the completion of the investigation or till the filing of the police report/charge sheet.

The bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan granted relief to the accused as it noted that both, the victim and accused have married each other and are living happily as husband and wife.

"Therefore, without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, the material available on record, the contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the undisputed fact by the parties that the applicant and the prosecutrix got married and are living happily together, the investigation is going on and the undertaking of the present applicant that he shall co-operate with the investigation and shall never misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present application may be protected till completion of the investigation or till filing of the police report/ charge-sheet under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C," the Court remarked.

Online Marketplaces Exempted From Liability U/S 79 IT Act: Allahabad HC Grants Relief To Flipkart In Product Discrepancy Case

Case title - Flipkart Internet Private Limited v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3487 of 2019]

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 467

Taking into account the mandate of Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, the Allahabad High Court recently granted relief to online Marketplace Flipkart in connection with a case wherein a laptop with a different company processor was delivered to the customer by the seller listed on the Flipkart.

For context, Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000 exempts the liability of intermediaries (like online marketplaces such as Flipkart) in certain cases. The provision states that an intermediary shall not be liable for any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted by it.

However, the provision will not apply if the intermediary has conspired or abetted or aided or induced, whether by threats or promise or otherwise in the commission of the unlawful act.

"Convict's Wife, Children Dependent Upon Him": Allahabad HC Commutes Death Penalty To Life Term In Minor's Rape-Murder Case

Case title - State of U.P. v. Govind Pasi along with a connected appeal

Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 468

The Allahabad High Court commuted the death penalty awarded to a rape and murder convict by the trial court to life imprisonment as it noted that the convict was of 20 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime in 2013 and now when he is around 29 year old, he has dependents in the form of wife and children.

"Convict/appellant was of 20 years of age at the time of the commission of crime now he has dependents in the form of wife and children. There is no evidence that the accused committed the crime with pre-planning or pre-ponderance. There is no evidence on record that there is no possibility of improvement in the conduct of the accused. No such evidence is adduced in the trial court that the accused is a hardened criminal. No criminal history of the appellant is stated during the trial," the bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Renu Agarwal as it affirmed the conviction of the appellant while setting aside the death penalty of the appellant awarded by the trial court and converting the same to Life Term.

Article 243Q | Governor's Power To Specify Municipality's Transitional Area Circumscribed By Statutory Stipulations: Allahabad High Court

Case Title: Sujit & Ors. v. State & Ors.

Citation:

The Allahabad High Court has made it clear that the Governor's power under Article 243Q of the Constitution, with respect to specifying transitional area of a Nagar Panchayat, is circumscribed by statutory stipulations.

A Division bench of Justices Manoj Kumar Gupta and Rajendra Kumar-IV observed,

"The Governor while being invested with power to include or exclude any area in a transitional area, or a smaller urban area, in exercise of power under clause (2) of Article 243Q of the Constitution, read with Section 3 of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916, has to follow the procedure prescribed under Section 4, which mandates that before issuance of notification under Section 3, a draft proposal has to be published in the manner provided under Section 4, so as to apprise the general public of the inclusions/exclusions and if any person has any objection, he may file objection/suggestion."

SC/ST Act | Special Court Can Treat Application Filed U/S 156 (3) CrPC As A 'Complaint': Allahabad High Court [DB]

Case title - Naresh Kumar Valmiki v. State of U.P. and others along with connected matters

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 470

In a significant decision, the Allahabad High Court has held that it is permissible for the Special Court designated under the SC/ST Act to take cognizance of an offence on itself by treating an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. as a complaint.

The bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Samit Gopal observed thus as it held that the view taken by the Single Judge in the case of Soni Devi vs. State of U.P. and others: 2022(5)ADJ 64 is incorrect.

Influence Of Money A Big Hurdle In Free And Fair Probe; Influential People Pressurize Police Officers: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Sanjeev @ Kallu Sethiya v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18458 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 471

In a significant observation, the Allahabad High Court has said that the influence of money in conducting an investigation is quite evident and it is a very big hurdle in the free and fair investigation of a crime and case.

Noting that under the pressure of work, police undertake a mechanical investigation of the crimes, the bench of Justice Siddharth further observed that the investigating officers are subjected to pressure by the influential persons of society to give a report as per their command.

"Two Consenting Adults' Yearning To Find Love Can't Be Interfered With By Anyone": Allahabad High Court Unites Husband-Wife

Case title - Sandeep Kumar And Another v. State Of U.P. And 9 Others [HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 536 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 472

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the choice of a life partner, the desire for personal intimacy, and the yearning to find love and fulfillment in a human relationship between two consenting adults cannot be interfered with by any other person.

With this, the bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh allowed a Habeas corpus plea filed by a husband after his wife/corpus submitted before the Court that she is willing to go with him and live her matrimonial life peacefully.

Recognition Of LoP By Speaker/Chairman Is A Part Of Convention Not Governed By 'UP State Legislature Act': Allahabad High Court

Case title - Lal Bihari Yadav v. Chairman/Sabhapati U.P. Legislative Council Vidhan Bhawan Lko & another [WRIT - C No. - 4493 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 473

The Allahabad High Court has held that there is no provision in the Uttar Pradesh State Legislature (Members' Emoluments and Pension) Act, 1980 which mandates the Speaker/Chairman of the house to recognize the leader of a party having the greatest numerical strength, to be the leader of the opposition.

The court further observed that if the Speaker recognizes any person who is the leader of a party in opposition having the greatest numerical strength as the leader of the opposition, he is doing so on the basis of the practice prevailing.

OTHER UPDATES FROM THE HIGH COURT

Gyanvapi ASI Survey Stay | Allahabad High Court Grants Last Opportunity To ASI's DG To File Affidavit, Imposes ₹10K Cost

In the ongoing hearing before the Allahabad High Court in connection with the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute, the High Court today granted a last opportunity to the Director General, Archaeological Survey of India to file a personal affidavit sought by the HC in 10 days.

Taking note of the fact that the Civil Suit is pending before the Civil Court Varanasi since 1991, the Bench of Justice Prakash Padia also imposed a cost of Rupees 10K on her, to be deposited in the Legal Services Committee, Allahabad

Planning To Build A Corridor At Banke Bihari Temple In Mathura: UP Govt Informs Allahabad High Court

The Uttar Pradesh Government has informed the Allahabad High Court that it is planning to build a corridor by acquiring five acres of land near the Banke Bihari temple (in Mathura) to provide facilities to the devotees.

For the uninitiated, Bankey Bihari Temple is situated in Vrindavan, Mathura and it is dedicated to Bankey Bihari who is believed to be the combined form of Radha and Krishna. This temple was established by Swami Haridas.

Allahabad High Court Issues Notice To Attorney General, Advocate General On PIL Challenging Waqf Act

The Allahabad High Court has issued notices to the Attorney General of India and the Advocate General on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea moved before it challenging the constitutionality of the Waqf Act, 1995. The matter has been listed as fresh on December 15, 2022.

Essentially, the bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice J. J. Munir is dealing with a PIL Plea moved by Ashish Tewari and others seeking directions from the Court to declare that a notification, order, decision, or rule issued under the Waqf Act would be non-applicable to the properties belonging to Hindus or members belonging to non-Islamic communities.