75 Important Judgments Of Allahabad High Court In 2023

1. 'Muslim Women Act' 1986| Divorced Muslim Wife Entitled To Maintenance Beyond Iddat Period, Until She Re-Marries: Allahabad HC Case title - Zahid Khatoon vs. Nurul Haque Khan [FIRST APPEAL No. - 787 of 2022] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 5 The Allahabad High Court has observed that as per Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to receive maintenance from her former husband not just till the completion of the 'Iddat' period, but for the rest of her life until she remarries. The bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi observed thus while setting aside an order of the family court wherein a divorced Muslim woman was found entitled to maintenance only for the period of iddat. 2. Absconder/Proclaimed Offender Not Entitled To Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court Case title - Anand Shankar Pandey And 2 Others vs. State Of U.P And Another [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8536 of 2022] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 21 The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that a person against whom a warrant has been issued and, is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of warrants and proceedings under Section 82 of the Code have been initiated against him, is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail. The bench of Justice Manju Rani Chauhan observed thus while denying anticipatory bail to three persons (father-in-law, mother-in-law, and wife of the deceased) accused of abetting the suicide of a man. 3. Right To Cross-Examine A Witness Can Be Denied Only In Exceptional Circumstances: Allahabad High Court Case title - Brijeash Saurabh Mishra @ Brijesh Mishra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 216 of 2023] Case citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 32 The Allahabad High Court has observed that the right to cross-examine a witness is a right that may be denied only in exceptional circumstances or in such circumstances where the order sheet reveals that the other side/ party is habitual in seeking adjournments for one reason or another. The bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan passed this order while setting aside an order of the trial court wherein the opportunity of cross-examination for the applicant (accused in a Gangster Act Case) of a prosecution witness was closed despite the fact that the applicant had moved an adjournment application on the ground that his counsel was busy in some other court. 4. Not Mandatory For The IO To File Chargesheet In Each FIR Lodged Under The SC-ST Act: Allahabad High Court Case title - Gyanendra Maurya @ Gullu vs. Union of India Thru Secy Ministry Social Justice and Empowerment, New Delhi and Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7522 of 2022] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 47 The Allahabad High Court has observed that it is not mandatory for the Investigating Officer to file a charge sheet in each and every case where an FIR has been lodged alleging the commission of offence under the SC/ST Act 1989. The Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Sanjay Kumar Pachori further clarified that Section 4(2)(e) of the 1989 Act and Rule 7(2) of the SC-ST Act Rules 1995 only enjoins upon the IO to file such a charge sheet where, based on evidence collected during the investigation, the offence is made out. 5. Object Of Maintenance Proceedings Isn't To Punish Husband For His Past Neglect But To Prevent Destitution Of Deserted Wife: Allahabad HC Case title - Bitola @ Rinku vs. State Of U.P. And Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 811 of 2022] Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 53 The Allahabad High Court set aside an order of the Family Court rejecting the application of one Bitola (revisionist/wife) seeking maintenance from her Husband on the ground that she is staying away from her husband without any sufficient reason. The bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh observed that the Family Court conducted the proceedings without being alive to the objects and reasons and the spirit of the provisions under Section 125 of CrPC and disregarded the basic canon of law that it is the sacrosanct duty of the husband to provide financial support to the wife, who is unable to maintain herself. 6. 'Azadi-Ka-Amrit Mahotsav' Relates To Citizens' Welfare But Police Administration Feels More Comfortable To Remain With Colonial Structure: Allahabad HC Case title - Chantara vs. State of U.P. Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 55 "Since 75th Independence Day Celebrations, Government has marked Azadi-ka-Amrit Mahotsav terming it to be 'Amrit Kaal' with prospective vision in the welfare of citizens of the country, however, Police Administration feels more comfortable to remain with colonial structure," the Allahabad High Court observed recently while taking exception to a...

75 Important Judgments Of Allahabad High Court In 2023

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags