Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: February 2026

[NOMINAL INDEX PROVIDED AT THE BOTTOM]ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE MONTHSimultaneous Issuance Of Recovery & Arrest Warrants For Maintenance Arrears Is Illegal: Allahabad High Court, Says Practice Must StopCase title - Mohammad Shahzad vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 50Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 50The Allahabad High Court has held that the routine practice prevalent in the Family Courts of issuing warrants for recovery and arrest simultaneously is illegal and inhumane and the same must stop.A bench of Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla observed that a person liable to pay maintenance is not to be treated as a person who has committed a crime and the dignity and liberty of such an individual cannot be trampled upon by the Courts to enforce a maintenance orderNo Bar To Consensual Transfer Of Matrimonial Cases U/S 24 CPC; Convenience Test Stands 'Considerably Diluted': Allahabad High CourtCase title - Arju @ Vimal vs. Umakant Parasar 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 51Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 51The Allahabad High Court has observed that there is no legal impediment to order a transfer of a case by invoking powers under Section 24 Civil Procedure Code when the contesting parties are ad idem (in agreement).The Court added that in cases of consensual transfers, the requirement for a detailed comparative examination of the balance of convenience stands considerably diluted.The observation was made by a bench of Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava while allowing a transfer application in a divorce suit. The Court said that while the plaintiff is ordinarily the dominus litis (master of the suit), this right is deemed waived when the transfer is not opposed.Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash Gangsters Act Proceedings Against Disqualified SP MLA Irfan SolankiCase title - Irfan Solanki vs. State of U.P. and another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 52Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 52The Allahabad High Court dismissed an application filed by former Samajwadi Party MLA Irfan Solanki, seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against him under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.A bench of Justice Samit Gopal rejected his plea under Section 528 BNSS as it took into account the fact that the trial is at an advanced stage and that prima facie material is available against him.'To Ease Pilgrim Pressure': High Court Upholds Extended 'Banke Bihari' Darshan Timings, Rejects Contempt Plea Against SC-Appointed PanelCase title - Gaurav Goswami vs. Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar (Rtd.) and 12 others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 53Case Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 53The Allahabad High Court has rejected a contempt application filed against the Supreme Court-appointed High-Powered Temple Management Committee, led by Justice Ashok Kumar (Rtd.), for increasing the darshan timings at the Thakur Shri Banke Bihari Ji Maharaj Temple (in Vrindavan-Mathura), allegedly in violation of HC's Novemebr 2022 order.A bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal noted that the Committee, empowered by the Top Court to oversee the day-to-day affairs of the temple, had decided to increase the darshan time, in light of the huge influx of pilgrims at the Temple who are facing great hardship.UP Govt's Ban On Political Caste Rallies Must Be Effective; Right Values In Children Is Permanent Solution: Allahabad High CourtCase title - Moti Lal Yadav vs. Chief Election Commissioner Election Commisn.of India and Ors 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 54Case Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 54The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed in 2013 seeking a ban on all caste-based political rallies and a direction to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to cancel the registration of political parties that organise such rallies.Noting that the State Government has already imposed a complete prohibition on such gatherings to preserve public order, a bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary expected a strict and effective implementation of the Government order.2026 CLAT-UG | One Question, Two Correct Answers: Why Allahabad High Court Ordered Revision Of Merit List For Future Counselling?Case title - Avneesh Gupta (Minor) vs. Consortium of National Law Universities 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 55Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 55In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court directed the Consortium of National Law Universities to revise the merit list for CLAT-UG-2026.The order was passed after a single judge found that the high-powered 'Oversight Committee' had arbitrarily overruled subject matter experts regarding a disputed question without assigning any reasons for the same.A bench of Justice Vivek Saran has ordered the Consortium to treat two options ('B' & 'D') as correct for the disputed Question No. 9 (in Booklet-C) and to all other questions which correspond to the same in different booklets of CLAT-2026 entrance examination and republish the merit list within one month.Allahabad High Court Awards ₹1 Lakh...

Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: February 2026

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags