All High Courts Weekly Round-Up: May 23 - May 29, 2022

Allahabad High Court NOMINAL INDEX 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...

All High Courts Weekly Round-Up: May 23 - May 29, 2022

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags