ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK Rohingya Funding Syndicate | Allahabad High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Alleged Kingpin, Slams IO For 'Callous' Approach Case Title - Dr. Abdul Ghaffar vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chif Secy. / Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 18 Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 18 The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) on Friday...
ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK
Case Title - Dr. Abdul Ghaffar vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chif Secy. / Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 18
Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 18
The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) on Friday refused anticipatory bail to a man alleged to be the 'main kingpin' of a syndicate that has been accused of extending illegal and unwarranted help to Bangladeshi, Rohingya and other anti-national people so that they can settle in India and create unrest and disharmony.
A Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava also expressed “serious displeasure and anguish” over the “callous and careless approach” of the investigating agency over failure to take appropriate steps to apprehend the accused in the case despite the gravity of the alleged offences.
Case Title - Sapna @ Sapna Choudhary vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 19
Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 19
The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) last week set aside a lower court order that refused to grant a 'No Objection Certificate' (NOC) to popular Actor-Dancer and stage performer, Sapna Choudhary, for the renewal of her passport.
Allowing her application filed under Section 482 CrPC, a bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia directed the trial court to issue an NOC to her for renewal.
Case Title - Kuldeep Verma vs. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 20
Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 20
In an order passed today, the Allahabad High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings against a teacher accused of maintaining a sexual relationship with his student for over a decade under the false promise of marriage.
A bench of Justice Avnish Saxena noted that since the accused was already married when he entered into a relationship with the victim, the alleged promise to marry her prima facie amounted to 'deceitful means' as contained under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) (Sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means).
Case Title - Bhagwat Kushwaha vs. State of U.P. 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 21
Case Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 21
The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday set aside the conviction of a man accused of kidnapping and rape while factoring in that the victim did not mention anything about forcible sexual assault during her medical examination or in her statement under Section 164 CrPC made before the Judicial Magistrate.
A bench of Justice Achal Sachdev noted that the victim's act of resiling (retracting) from her exculpatory statements given to the Magistrate during the trial casts a “shadow of doubt” over her integrity and the same had weakened the prosecution's case.
Case Title: Poem Jaiswar v. Union Of India And Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 22
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 22
The Allahabad High Court has held that passport can only be denied for reasons enumerated under Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967 and cannot be denied for administrative consideration and in circumstance where there is parental dispute, matrimonial disputes and criminal matters pending between natural guardians of a minor.
Referring to Section 6 of the Act, the bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi held that “The authorities do not have a general or discretionary power to deny a passport on other extraneous or administrative grounds. In the present case of a minor, no such conditions exist that would justify rejection of the application. Parental disputes or pending matrimonial and criminal matters between the natural guardians cannot constitute a valid statutory reason for refusal. Therefore, the passport authorities are duty-bound to process and issue the passport once the prescribed formalities are completed and there is no prohibitory order.”
Case Title: Ache Lal v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 23
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 23
The Allahabad High Court has held that there is no provision in the scheme of compassionate appointment under the U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 which provides for determination of suitability based on will of the deceased. It held that compassionate appointment is granted based on dependence of the family member upon the deceased employee.
Justice Manish Mathur held, “…the aspect of registered Will in favour of any member of family does not have any role to play with regard to grant of compassionate employment. The only aspect requires to be seen for such benefit is the suitability of the person for providing such employment. Such suitability necessarily has to be seen based on the fact whether the applicant was dependent upon the deceased employee or not. The overall interest and welfare of the entire family particularly widow and minor members thereof is also a sine qua non as indicated in Rule - 7 of the Rules of 1974.”
Case Title: Sangam Lal VersusThe New India Assurance Co. Ltd. And Anr.2026 LiveLaw (AB) 24
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 24
The Allahabad High Court has held that an unemployed minor having 100% permanent functional disability after accident, is entitled to compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act as a "skilled workman".
While dealing with an appeal for enhancement of compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Justice Sandeep Jain held: “even if, it is assumed that the claimant was only 16 years old and was not in any gainful employment at the time of the accident even then, he is entitled to get compensation on the basis that he was a skilled workman.”
Case title - Umme Farva vs. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 25
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 25
In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court has issued a strict mandamus to the police machinery in the state to mandatorily initiate prosecution against individuals/informants who lodge false or malicious First Information Reports (FIRs).
A bench of Justice Praveen Kumar Giri held that if an investigation reveals that an FIR was based on false information, the IO is “statutorily obligated” to file a formal complaint against the informant under Section 215(1)(a) BNSS (corresponding to Section 195(1)(a) CrPC).
Other updates of the week
In a stinging rebuke to the UP Govt regarding the implementation of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, the Allahabad High Court recently issued a show-cause notice to the Additional Chief Secretary (Home).
A bench of Justice Vinod Diwakar has directed the top bureaucrat to explain the repeated failure of the Home Department to provide justification for excluding District Magistrates from the joint meetings contemplated under the State Gangsters Act for the districts which fall under the Police Commissionerate system.
In a strong remark, the Court said: "even the most well-intentioned and ostensibly noble ideas are liable to miscarry when placed in the hands of poor administrators namely, those who are inadequately trained and lacking in institutional competence, yet highly ambitious and adept at manoeuvring constitutional authorities"