- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Allahabad High Court Monthly...
Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: August 2022 [Citations 349 - 406]
Sparsh Upadhyay
6 Sep 2022 3:21 AM GMT
![Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: August 2022 [Citations 349 - 406]](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2022/02/01/750x450_408722-allahabad-high-court-monthly-digest.jpg "Allahabad High Court Monthly Digest: August 2022 [Citations 349 - 406]")
NOMINAL INDEX Kusum Lata Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 349 M/s Bindal Smelting Pvt. Ltd. versus Commissioner of Trade Tax, Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 350 The Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow Versus S/S G.S.C. Toughened Glass 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 351 Rashmi Srivastava v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko.Asssss 2022 LiveLaw...
NOMINAL INDEX
Kusum Lata Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 349
M/s Bindal Smelting Pvt. Ltd. versus Commissioner of Trade Tax, Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 350
The Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow Versus S/S G.S.C. Toughened Glass 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 351
Rashmi Srivastava v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko.Asssss 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 352
Poonam Kushwaha v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 353
Susheel Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 354
Sidhique Kappan v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 355
Ravi Sarthi And 2 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education,Lko. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 356
Lakhan @ Babblu v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 357
Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 358
Anurag Sharma v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 359
Mohan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 360
M/S Bcits Pvt. Ltd. v. Purvanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 361
Fayanath Yadav S/O Late Devdutt Yadav (Fourth Bail) v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 362
Javed v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 363
Nabco Products Private Limited versus Union of India and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 364
Babu v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 365
Raj Kishore @ Pappu v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 366
Archana Devi v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 367
Neha Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 368
Vikas Kumar Alias Vikas Agrahari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 369
Amar Singh v. State 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 370
Triyugi Nath Tiwari v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 371
Dr. Vijay Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 372
Nirbhay Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others along with connected pleas 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 373
Ajay Kumar Yadav And Another v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others along with connected matters 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 374
SR Cold Storage versus Union of India and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 375
Sunil Kumar Chauhan And 186 Others v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others along with connected petitions 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 376
Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs. State Of U.P. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 377
Smt. Kiran Kunwar And 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 378
Azahar Khan v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 379
Gaurav @ Govind v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 380
Km. Mohini v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 381
In Re v. Shri Chandan Kumar, Investigating Officer 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 382
Drs Wood Products Lucknow Versus State Of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 383
Intezamia Committee Shahi Masjid v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 384
Manjeet Tanwar @ Manjeet Tankar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 385
Ajeet Shukla And Ors. v. The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Civil Sectt.And Ors 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 386
Puspha Devi W/O Sri Jai Karan Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homr Lko 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 387
Alam @ Mohammad Alam v. State Of U.P. and another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 388
Richa Dubey v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 389
Smt. Ramkali Samajik Utthan Evan Jan Kalyan Samiti Thru. Secy. Adv. Manoj Kumar Yadav v. Union Of India Thru. The Ministry Of Social Justice And Empowerment New Delhi And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 390
Avneesh Kumar And Another v. Dr Sujoy Lal Thaosen,Director And 2 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 391
Mohd.Shakib v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 392
Vaibhav Singh v. Smt. Divyashika Singh 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 393
Ramkrit Yadav v. State Of U.P. And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 394
Ashish Yadav v. State Of U.P And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 395
Ishrat v. State 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 396
Abbas Ansari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 397
Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another v. U.P Sunni Central Waqf Board And 3 Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 398
Kanta v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 399
Deepak @ Deep Prakash @ Deepu v. State Of U.P., Through Secretary Home Govt. Of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 400
Rajdhari Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 401
Gabbar Patel @ Dharmendra v. State 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 402
Dr. Vijay Arora v. King George Medical University Thru. Registrar Lko And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 403
Pramod Kumar Singh And 5 Others v. State Of U.P. And 11 Others along with a connected plea 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 404
Mohd. Saif Ali v. State of U.P 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 405
Gufran Shaikh @ Gani Munawwar v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 406
ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE MONTH
Case citation: Kusum Lata Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 28249 of 2021]
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 349
Stressing that the protection of the life of the individuals engaged in election duty during COVID-19 is an absolute duty of the State, the Allahabad High Court has ordered the State Government to release the ex-gratia payment to the dependents of such individuals who died due to COVID in and around their election duty during COVID-19 second wave (April-May 2021).
The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan also held that if a person, who was admitted to the hospital as a COVID patient, died due to heart failure or any other reason, even then, such death will be considered a COVID Death and the government shall be liable to provide an ex-gratia amount to the relatives of the deceased.
Case Title: M/s Bindal Smelting Pvt. Ltd. versus Commissioner of Trade Tax, Lucknow
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 350
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the conditions enumerated in Exemption Notification No. KA-NI-2-3867, dated 22.12.2001, for availing exemption from Trade Tax under Section 4-A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, are mandatory in nature and have to be strictly complied with.
The Single Bench of Justice Alok Mathur held that since the land was not transferred to the applicant before the cut-off date as prescribed under the said Exemption Notification, the applicant could not be considered as a "new unit" and hence, it was not eligible for trade tax exemption under Section 4-A.
10% VAT Payable On Insulated Glass: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: The Commissioner Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow Versus S/S G.S.C. Toughened Glass
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 351
The Allahabad High Court has held that 10% Value Added Tax (VAT) is payable on insulated glass.
The single judge bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh has observed that insulated glass is nothing but double glazed dual sheet (DGDS).
The department has filed the revision against the order passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal. In that order, the Tribunal has allowed the assessee's appeal and held that insulated glass manufactured and sold by the assessee falls within the general description of 'plain glass-panes'. Therefore, it is excluded from Notification No. 1273 dated April 25, 2001 as amended from time to time. Accordingly, insulated glass has been held taxable as an unclassified commodity at the rate of 10%.
Case title - Rashmi Srivastava v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko.Andors
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 352
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the right to change the name is a facet of a fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India and that such a right cannot be denied.
Essentially, the bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia observed this while hearing the plea of a lady (named Rajni Shrivastava) who wanted to change her name to 'Rashmi Srivastava', however, her application regarding this was rejected by the UP Secondary Education board.
Case title - Poonam Kushwaha v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [HABEAS CORPUS WRIT PETITION No. - 402 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 353
The Allahabad High Court came down hard on the practice of filing Habeas Corpus Petitions to exert pressure upon the police to speed up their investigation. The bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi observed thus:
"The Habeas Corpus Petitions should not to be used as whip over the police to officials, just to serve out the petition's vanity over the police."
The Court also noted that in cases where the FIR with regard to the alleged act of kidnapping, abduction, illegal confinement, or for ransom is filed and police personnel are pursuing the matter at their end, the lodging of a parallel Habeas Corpus Petition in such cases could be called as motivated and purposive one.
Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Throwing Objectionable Meat At Ayodhya's Edgah
Case title - Susheel Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8422 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 354
The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to one Susheel Kumar who has been accused of throwing objectionable meat at Edgah in Ayodhya along with some objectionable papers.
The bench of Justice Krishan Pahal granted him bail keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding the complicity of the accused, and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Kumar had moved the Court seeking bail in a criminal case registered under Sections 295, 295-A, 120-B, and 34 IPC. As per the prosecution story, some unknown persons had thrown objectionable meat at Edgah along with some objectionable papers on 27.04.2022.
Case title - Sidhique Kappan v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 355
The Allahabad High Court denied bail to Kerala journalist Siddique Kappan in connection with the 'Hathras Conspiracy Case' as it noted that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accusations against Kappan are prima facie true.
At the outset, the Court noted that during the investigation, it had come on record that Kappan had no work at Hathras when he was arrested.
"The State machinery was at tenterhooks owing to the tension prevailing due to various types of information being viral across all forums of media including the internet. The said sojourn of the applicant with co-accused persons who do not belong to media fraternity is a crucial circumstance going against him," the Court further said.
Case title - Ravi Sarthi And 2 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Higher Education,Lko. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 5028 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 356
The Allahabad High Court has directed the Babu Banarasi Das University in Lucknow to declare the results of 3 LLM students that were withheld by the University administration over non-payment of fee.
The Bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia was essentially hearing the plea filed by Ravi Sarthi and 2 others who are pursuing their Masters of Law Degree with specialization in Criminal and Security Law offered by the BBD University.
Case title - Lakhan @ Babblu v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5765 of 2011] along with connected government appeal
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 357
The Allahabad High Court has observed that in acquittal appeals, the appellate Court is not required to rewrite the judgment or to give fresh reasonings when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper.
The bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Ajai Tyagi further observed that while exercising appellate powers, even if two reasonable views/conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.
Case title - Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2133 of 2021]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 358
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a self-styled international Hindu Leader and Yogi Sena Pramukh, Kuldeep Sharma @ Kuldeep Hindu who has been accused of taking money from the public at large by way of cheating.
The Bench of Justice Krishan Pahal granted him bail considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and the period of incarceration while keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding, his complicity, and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He was in jail since December 2020.
Case title - Anurag Sharma v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3603 of 2018]
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 359
The Allahabad High Court has observed that if the place of hiding the weapon is exclusively within the knowledge of the accused and that place cannot be or is not in the knowledge of any other person and the weapon is recovered from the same place, such type of recovery is absolutely reliable.
The bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Ajai Tyagi observed this while upholding the conviction of a murder accused (Anurag Sharma) who killed his own father and was sentenced to life imprisonment by Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in 2018.
Case title - Mohan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1621 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 360
In a significant order, the Allahabad High Court has allowed conduct of DNA Test in a murder trial as it noted that the same was in the interets of justice to unearth the truthfulness of the prosecution's case.
However, the bench of Justice Gautam Chowdhary did stress that the DNA test should not to be directed as a matter of routine and in only deserving cases where a strong prima facie case is made out.
The Court noted that the contention of the murder accused that he is innocent would be proved if the DNA samples are not matched and it would come on the record that he was being falsely roped in the case.
Case title - M/S Bcits Pvt. Ltd. v. Purvanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. And Another [WRIT - C No. - 15363 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 361
The Allahabad High Court set aside a show cause notice sent after pre-mediation as the Court noted that the respondent (a government authority) had already made up their mind and had expressed their decision in the notice while issuing the same to the petitioner (M/S Bcits Pvt. Ltd.).
"...even if the petitioner offers its explanation, it would be an empty formality and a futile exercise. Fairness demanded that the respondent should have taken care to keep their mind open to the issues while seeking an explanation," remarked the bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Dinesh Pathak.
Case title - Fayanath Yadav S/O Late Devdutt Yadav (Fourth Bail) v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7404 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 362
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a dowry death accused (in jail for about 11 years) after it expressed its anguish over the poor progress of the trial in the case.
The bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed was essentially dealing with the fourth bail application of one Fayanath Yadav booked in a criminal case registered against him under Sections 498-A, 304-B, I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Case title - Javed v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 890 of 2002]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 363
In a judgment delivered last week, the Allahabad High Court modified the conviction of a murder accused from Section 302 IPC to Section 304 Part 1 IPC as it noted that the culpable homicide was committed without premeditation on being called a Kafir (meaning thereby the person who does not believe in religion),
The bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Ajai Tyagi modified the conviction of one Javed as it stressed that the incident had occurred because of the deceased calling him (accused/appellant) a Kafir cannot be said that it was a premeditated murder.
Income Tax Officers Are Frequently Violating Principles Of Natural Justice: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: Nabco Products Private Limited versus Union of India and Ors.
The Allahabad High Court criticized the Income Tax Authorities for frequently violating the principles of natural justice.
The Court ruled that the harassment caused to the assessees and the breach of principles of natural justice by the Income Tax Officers has become uncontrolled due to the absence of an effective system of accountability of the erring officers.
Case title - Babu v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2878 of 2013]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 365
"...no accused person is incapable of being reformed and therefore, all measures should be applied to give them an opportunity of reformation in order to bring them in the social stream," the Allahabad High Court observed as it modified the sentence of an accused convicted under Section 304 Part 1 IPC.
The bench of Justice Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Justice Ajai Tyagi further stressed that undue harshness should be avoided while sentencing keeping in view the reformative approach underlying our criminal justice system.
Case title - Raj Kishore @ Pappu v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1443 of 2008]
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 366
The Allahabad High Court has observed that in absence of cogent evidence that the Murder accused was in the house with the deceased at the relevant time, the provisions of Section 106 of the Evidence Act can not be pressed into service to put the onus on him to explain as to under what circumstances the deceased died.
With this, the bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi set aside the order and judgment of Sessions Judge, Etah in 2003 convicting and sentencing one Raj Kishore @ Pappu under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Appeal U/S 372 CrPC For Enhancement Of Punishment Not Maintainable: Allahabad High Court
Case title - Archana Devi v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others [CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION DEFECTIVE U/S 372 CR.P.C (LEAVE TO APPEAL) No. - 1 of 2014]
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 367
The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that an appeal filed under Section 372 CrPC is not maintainable if it has been filed seeking enhancement of punishment awarded to the accused.
It may be noted that Section 372 CrPC provides a right 'victim' [as defined under Section 2w (wa) of the Cr.P.C.] to move an appeal on three grounds namely
(i) When the accused person(s) have been acquitted;
(ii) When the accused person(s) have been convicted for a lesser offence;
(iii) Where inadequate compensation has been imposed by the Court (s).
Case title - Neha Yadav v. State Of U.P. And 4 Others [WRIT - C No. - 20091 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 368
The Allahabad High Court has observed that under the U.P. Kshetra Panchayats and Zila Panchayats Adhiniyam, 1961, an elected member of the Kshettra Panchayat shall be deemed to have vacated his office from the date on which notice of his resignation is received in the office of Kshetra Panchayat.
The bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava further observed that the vacancy in the office of Kshettra Panchayat becomes effective from the date, the resignation notice of a member is received in the office of the Kshetra Panchayat.
Case title - Vikas Kumar Alias Vikas Agrahari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others [CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5658 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 369
Stressing that wrongdoers should not get benefits out of frivolous litigation, the Allahabad High Court imposed a cost of ₹25,000/- on a petitioner who concealed material facts from the court that he had earlier filed two anticipatory bail applications and did not comply with court's orders.
The bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav imposed costs on Vikas Kumar Alias Vikas Agrahari (petitioner) who moved the Court seeking to quash an FIR registered against him under sections 417, 376, 504, 506 IPC.
Case title - Amar Singh v. State [JAIL APPEAL No. - 5100 of 2011]
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 370
The Allahabad High Court set aside the conviction order passed against a rape accused as it found each and every part of the testimony of the prosecutrix to be 'infirm', 'doubtful', and 'contradictory'.
Significantly, the accused has already been released after serving a full sentence after getting the benefit of a remission period.
The bench of Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar found that in support of the testimony of the prosecutrix no corroborative evidence was presented before the Court and that the prosecution had not been able to prove the place of occurrence, the time of occurrence, and the manner of occurrence.
Case title - Triyugi Nath Tiwari v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE U/S 372 CR.P.C. No.- 10 of 2022]
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 371
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the amendments made in Section 372 CrPC by adding a proviso in the year 2009, creating a substantive right of appeal for the 'victim' is not retrospective in nature.
Meaning thereby, a 'victim' [as defined under Section 2w (wa) of CrPC] has no right to prefer an appeal against an order passed before December 31, 2009, acquitting the accused/punishing him for a lesser offence/imposing inadequate compensation.
Case title - Dr. Vijay Kumar v. State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1751 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 372
The Allahabad High Court denied bail to former BSP MLA Dr. Vijay Kumar, the prime accused in the Shikhar Srivastava murder case as the Court noted that he is a resourceful person who could evade his arrest for four long years and might have even managed the CID probe if the HC had not intervened.
Observing that the accused was not allowing the trial to proceed, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh denied him bail after noting that if released on bail, he would be in a position to influence the witnesses and tamper with the evidence.
Case title - Nirbhay Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others along with connected pleas
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 373
The Allahabad High Court (division bench) has ruled that in view of Section 27 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, teachers can be deployed for election duty even before issuance of the notification relating to elections to Local Body, a State Assembly or the Parliament.
The bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Jaspreet Singh further ruled that the teachers cannot be deployed during teaching days or teaching hours but can be on non-teaching days and non-teaching hours.
Essentially, the bench was answering the reference made to it by the Single Judge vide its order dated November 11, 2021, regarding the allotment of election duties (before or after the issuance of election notification) to teachers on teaching days/during teaching hours.
Case title - Ajay Kumar Yadav And Another v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others along with connected matters
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 374
The Allahabad High Court has observed that candidates cannot claim as a matter of right that recruitment on any post should be made every year. With this, the Court denied relief to certain over-aged Assistant Prosecution Officer Exam - 2022 candidates.
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery also emphasized that due to inaction on the part of the State Government in not filing the posts year-wise, the candidates cannot get a right to participate in the selection process being over-aged.
Case Title: SR Cold Storage versus Union of India and Ors.
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 375
The Allahabad High Court has directed that the Union of India or other authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961 shall not interfere with the quasi-judicial functions and discharge of statutory duties by the Assessing Officers unless permitted by the Income Tax Act.
Further, the High Court directed the Union of India to put in place a mechanism to ensure that the information fed on data-base/ portal of the revenue department is verified in reality, and not as an empty formality, before initiating proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Case title - Sunil Kumar Chauhan And 186 Others v. State Of U.P. And 5 Others along with connected petitions
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 376
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the entire Police Establishment including the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) shall be deemed to be one Police Force. and that transfer can be made from PAC to Civil Police or vice versa.
With this, the bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery upheld the order of the UP Govt transferring constables and head constables in Uttar Pradesh Provincial Armed Constabulary (UPPAC) to the civil police and dismissed dozens of petitions filed against the transfer.
Case title - Sanjay Kumar Singh Vs. State Of U.P. And Another [WRIT - A No. - 47252 of 2003]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 377
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that an appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be claimed or offered after a significant lapse of time and after the crisis is over.
"The object of compassionate appointment is to tide over the immediate financial crisis suffered by the bereaved family due to the unexpected death of the employee concerned," the Court remarked.
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed thus while dismissing the plea of one Sanjay Kumar Singh who sought appointment on compassionate ground on account of the death of his adoptive father, who died in harness in January 1995.
The Court also held that the claim of the petitioner for a compassionate appointment at a belated stage, after 27 years of the death of his father, cannot be sustained.
Case Title - Smt. Kiran Kunwar And 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15581 of 2019]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 378
The Allahabad High Court has observed that if the order of taking cognizance has been passed on the first page of the charge-sheet in the hand writing not by filling up the proforma then the summoning order carried on the order-sheet on printed proforma won't be invalid.
The bench of Justice Mohd. Aslam clarified that if after taking cognizance of the police charge sheet by way of a written order, summons is issued on the printed proforma, then it cannot be said that the cognizance order is a proforma order.
The Court was dealing with a Section 482 CrPC plea filed by the applicants seeking to quash the cognizance order passed by the Additional Civil Judge (SD)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.P. Nagar.
Case title - Azahar Khan v. State of U.P
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 379
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to one Azahar Khan accused of assaulting the police officers, damaging police bikes by setting them on fire, and also causing damage to public property during the CAA-NRC Protests.
As per the prosecution's case, a protest against NRC and CAB was organized by Muslim Clerics (Ulemas) of Rampur city and they called the public at Eidgah on December 21, 2019.
In the night of December 20, 2019, the Muslim clerics of Rampur City assured the police administration that considering the atmosphere of Rampur city, the procession has been canceled. The next morning also, the clerics again assured the police that no crowd will be gathered but probably the clerics did not inform the police in this regard.
Case title - Gaurav @ Govind v. State of U.P. and Another
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 380
The Allahabad High Court explained the difference between the Section 174 CrPC [Police to enquire and report on suicide, etc.] and Section 157 CrPC [Procedure for investigation preliminary inquiry].
The Court emphasized that the preparation of inquest under Section 174 Cr.P.C. is in fact in the nature of inquiry, and the same cannot be equated with the investigation contemplated under Section 157 Cr.P.C. which commences after lodging of F.I.R. under Section 154 Cr.P.C.
Case title - Km. Mohini v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [WRIT - A No. - 4174 of 2022]
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 381
The Allahabad High Court has held that as per the UP Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, the benefit of compassionate appointment cannot be given to a sister in the presence of a wife.
The bench of Justice Neeraj Tiwari observed that under the UP Dying in Harness Rules 1974 as amended by 2021 rules, a wife has the first right to a compassionate appointment, and in her presence, the Sister does not have the right to a compassionate appointment.
Case title - In Re v. Shri Chandan Kumar, Investigating Officer
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 382
The Allahabad High Court sentenced a police officer to undergo simple imprisonment for 14 days after holding him guilty of contempt for deliberately bypassing the mandate of the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
As per the Arnesh Kumar judgment, the arrest should be the exception where the offence is punishable with less than 7 years imprisonment, and notice for appearance under Section 41A CrPC should be served on the accused in such cases instead of arrest. The arrest can be made in exceptional circumstances in such cases, but the reasons have to be recorded in writing.
Allahabad High Court Imposes Cost Of Rs. 50000 For Arbitrary Cancellation of GST Registration
Case Title: Drs Wood Products Lucknow Versus State Of U.P.
Case Citation: : 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 383
The Allahabad High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 for the arbitrary cancellation of GST registration.
The single bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia observed that the arbitrary exercise of power to cancel the registration in the manner in which it has been done has adversely affected the petitioner. It has also had a negative impact on the revenues that could have flowed into the coffers of GST had the petitioner been allowed to conduct commercial activities. The actions were clearly not in consonance with the ease of doing business, which is being promoted at all levels.
Case title - Intezamia Committee Shahi Masjid v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [WRIT - C No. - 15737 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 384
The Allahabad High Court dismissed a writ plea moved against the proposed removal of the Shahi Masjid located at G.T. Road, Saidabad (purportedly more than 100 years old) for the purposes of a state highway widening project.
The bench of Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) refused to entertain the plea moved Intezamia Committee Shahi Masjid by taking into account the submission made by the official authoritires that the Masjid is an encroachment on the government land.
Case title - Manjeet Tanwar @ Manjeet Tankar v. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 385
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the transport of cow skin leather does not amount to any contravention of provisions of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, and therefore, the Magistrate has power under sections 451 or 457 Cr.P.C. to release a vehicle by which allegedly skin leather of cow or its progeny was transported.
With this, the bench of Justice Mohd. Aslam set aside an order of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra rejecting the application filed by the revisionist seeking the release of his vehicle allegedly used to transport Cow Skin Leather.
Case title - Ajeet Shukla And Ors. v. The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Civil Sectt.And Ors [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5776 of 2017]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 386
The Allahabad High Court has observed that even if the police officials exceed, to some extent, their authority in the discharge of their official/public duty, then also sanction would be required under section 197 CrPC for their prosecution.
Section 197 Cr.P.C. deals with the prosecution of Judges and Public Servants wherein sanction of the Government is stipulated for taking cognizance of an offence alleged to have been committed while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his duties.
The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh categorically held that the court is barred to take cognizance of an alleged offence committed by the police personnel, which may be in excess of his official/public duty, if the prosecution has been initiated against such personnel without required sanction u/s 197 CrPC.
Case Title - Puspha Devi W/O Sri Jai Karan Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homr Lko
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 387
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a murder accused who was summoned in a 'cursory manner' under section 319 of CrPC by the trial court based on the statements of the prosecution witnesses.
The bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed noted that the applicant was not even named in the F.I.R. and she was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. on the premise of statements of witnesses in the trial court.
Under Section 319 CrPC, the Court has been given the power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence.
Case title - Alam @ Mohammad Alam v. State Of U.P. and another
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 388
The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Siddique Kappan's Co-Accused, Mohammad Alam, a Cab Driver, in connection with the 'Hathras Conspiracy Case'. The Court observed that no incriminating article was recovered from his possession.
UAPA Accused Alam, who was arrested on October 5, 2020, while on his way to Hathras, has been granted bail by the Bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav as it found no complicity and involvement of the appellant with the terrorist activities or any other activity against the nation.
Slain Gangster Vikas Dubey's Wife Granted Anticipatory Bail By Allahabad High Court In Cheating Case
Case title - Richa Dubey v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION US 438 CR.P.C. No. - 7168 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 389
The Allahabad High Court has granted anticipatory bail to the wife of slain gangster Vikas Dubey (of Bikru, Kanpur) in a case registered against her under Sections 419 and 420 of IPC for allegedly using her servant's SIM card without his will.
The bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Gupta granted her grant anticipatory bail to the applicant till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned.
Case Title - Smt. Ramkali Samajik Utthan Evan Jan Kalyan Samiti Thru. Secy. Adv. Manoj Kumar Yadav v. Union Of India Thru. The Ministry Of Social Justice And Empowerment New Delhi And 2 Others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 390
The Allahabad High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea seeking enhancement of the age of retirement from 60 to 62 years in respect of the employees of the State Government who are differently abled.
The petitioner (Ramkali Samajik Utthan Evan Jan Kalyan Samiti) argued that since the differently-abled government employees working in the State of Haryana and the State of Punjab have been given the benefit of age of superannuation of 62 years, whereas in the State of U.P., the age of superannuation of differently-abled employees is 60 years, hence such employees in the State of U.P. have been discriminated against.
Case title - Avneesh Kumar And Another v. Dr Sujoy Lal Thaosen,Director And 2 Others [CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4616 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 391
The Allahabad High Court has directed the Central Government to comply with its March 7, 2022 order wherein it had directed the UOI and SSB to consider the candidature of 3 SSB Exam Candidates who were denied employment on account of certain tattoos on a certain part of their hands (forearm), in case they remove such tattoo.
On March 7, 2022, the Bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma had directed the Centre and the SSB that if the petitioners' tattoos are removed then that particular disability may not be considered as an obstacle for selection on the ministerial posts for which the petitioners had applied.
Case title - Mohd.Shakib v. State of U.P. [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23143 of 2021]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 392
The Allahabad High Court has observed that mere transportation of a cow and its progeny within the state of Uttar Pradesh is not a violation of any of the provisions of the UP Cow Slaughter Act.
The Bench of Justice Mohd. Aslam further held that no permit is required to transport the cow and its progeny within the state of Uttar Pradesh.
With this, the court set aside an order passed by District Magistrate, Varanasi to seize a vehicle on the allegations that the same was carrying animals for the purpose of cow slaughtering without valid permission.
Able-Bodied Husband Can't Argue That He Isn't In Position To Maintain His Wife: Allahabad High Court
Case title - Vaibhav Singh v. Smt. Divyashika Singh [FIRST APPEAL No. - 554 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 393
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that an able-bodied husband cannot argue that he is not in a position to maintain his wife.
The observation was made while dismissing an appeal filed by the Husband against the order passed by the family court under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act [Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings] in a proceeding for divorce instituted by the husband.
Case title - Ramkrit Yadav v. State Of U.P. And Another [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10162 of 2022]
Case citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 394
"Custodial violence, custodial torture and custodial deaths have always been a concern for civilized society. Times and again the judicial verdicts of the Apex Court and other Courts have shown their concern and anguish in such matters," observed Allahabad High Court as it denied bail to a cop in connection with the custodial death of a 24-year-old man.
The bench of Justice Samit Gopal categorically observed that it was not only a case of police excess but a clear-cut case of abuse of police powers and police high-handedness.
Case title - Ashish Yadav v. State Of U.P And Another [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23834 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 395
The Allahabad High Court has requested the High Court Legal Services Committee Allahabad to appoint lady counsels to represent the victims especially when the victims are minor girls.
The bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot was essentially dealing with the bail plea of a POCSO Accused when it noted that very few lady counsels appear to represent the victims from the side of the High Court Legal Services Committee.
"The High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Allahabad has been empanelled counsels to represent the victims. However, it is noticed that very few lady counsels have appeared for the victims. In such circumstances, the High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Allahabad is requested to appoint lady counsels to represent the victims especially when the victims are minor girls," the Court said.
Case title - Ishrat v. State [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1935 of 1992]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 396
The Allahabad High Court upheld the conviction and 3-year imprisonment awarded to a man who had mutilated the private part of a 4-year-old girl in the year 1988 and was convicted by the Sessions Court under sections 324 and 354 IPC.
The bench of Justice Krishan Pahal categorically held that mutilating the private part of the minor girl cannot be termed as an act of a person of normal virtues and that the accused had committed the act out of severe sexual lust and a sadistic approach.
"This is one of the most serious and diabolic offence committed against a minor girl of tender age of four years," the Court remarked as it canceled the Bail bonds of the accused-appellant and he was directed to surrender before the court below forthwith to serve out his remaining sentence.
Case title - Abbas Ansari v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko [Criminal Misc, Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. No. - 1396 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 397
The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow bench) last week denied anticipatory bail to Mau Sadar MLA Abbas Ansari, the son of jailed politician Mukhtar Ansari in connection with the Arms License case.
Denying him bail, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh took into account the fact that Ansari had been avoiding the process of the Court, against whom proclamation had been issued by the Court.
"Considering the serious allegations that accused-applicant got registered his arm license fraudulently and obtained prohibited Barrels, weapons and cartridges in large numbers by taking ground of shooting; and he has purchased weapons and cartridges, which are prohibited in shooting practice and against the Notification dated 4.8.2014 of the Government of India, and also considering the fact that accused-applicant has been avoiding the process of the Court, against whom proclamation has been issued, this Court does not find any ground to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-applicant."
Case title - Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another v. U.P Sunni Central Waqf Board And 3 Others
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 398
The Allahabad High Court has directed the Mathura Court to decide on two applications pending before it, filed in connection with the Sri Krishna Janambhumi Dispute, within 4 months. The applications essentially seek a survey of the disputed site and the appointment of a court commissioner for the purpose of the survey.
The Bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal issued this order on a plea made by Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman And Another by observing thus:
"Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, the present petition stands disposed of finally with a direction to the concerned court below to consider and decide application dated 13.5.2022 i.e. paper no. 35 Ga and 37 Ga u/s 26 CPC pending in aforesaid case in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, but certainly after giving opportunity to the parties concerned and without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment."
Case title - Kanta v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 549 of 1983]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 399
The Allahabad High Court last week upheld the conviction of a man under Section 304 of the IPC who was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304 (II) of the IPC for committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the year 1981.
Stressing that relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witnes, the bench of Justice Vikram D. Chauhan observed that mere statement that being relatives of the deceased they are likely to falsely implicate the accused cannot be a ground to discard the evidence which is otherwise cogent and credible.
"Merely because the witnesses are family members their evidence cannot per se be discarded. When there is allegation of interestedness, the same has to be established...It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person. Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made. There is no bar in law on examining family members as witness. Evidence of a related witness can be relied upon provided it is trustworthy," the Court further remarked.
Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Slain Gangster Vikas Dubey's Brother In Cheating Case
Case title - Deepak @ Deep Prakash @ Deepu v. State Of U.P., Through Secretary Home Govt. Of U.P [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 54178 of 2021]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 400
The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to the slain gangster Vikas Dubey's brother Deepak Dubey in connection with a cheating case. The allegation against Dubey is that he was found using a sim card registered in someone else's name with the intention to commit crime.
However, keeping in view the nature of the offence, the argument advanced on behalf of the parties, evidence on record regarding the complicity of the accused, and the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the bench of Justice Siddharth granted him bail.
Case title - Rajdhari Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3607 of 2021]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 401
The Allahabad High Court has observed that the Magistrate/Special Judge, NDPS Act has the power to consider the application for the interim custody of the conveyance/ vehicle (seized under the NDPS Act) under the provision of Section 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C.
"A perusal of Section 36- C and 51 of the NDPS Act indicates that the provisions of Cr.PC. so far as, they are not in contradictions with the special Act NDPS Act, shall be applicable to the NDPS Act and as in the NDPS Act no procedure for interim custody of the vehicle is prescribed Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C. specifically deal with the custody and disposal of property pending trial and the procedure to be followed by the police upon seizure of property," the bench of Justice Sadhna Rani (Thakur) remarked.
Case title - Gabbar Patel @ Dharmendra v. State [JAIL APPEAL No. - 5752 of 2007]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 402
The Allahabad High Court has observed that even if an accused pleads guilty in his statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC, even then the prosecution has to establish its case beyond so as to obtain an order of the court regarding the guilt of the accused.
"...mere stating of being guilty (by the accused) in the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. will end the issue and would lead the route only to the guilt of the accused without prosecution establishing its case beyond reasonable doubt against him through cogent, reliable and admissible evidence," the bench of Justice Samit Gopal remarked.
With this, the Court acquitted Accused/Gabbar Patel of charges under section 307 IPC by extending the benefit of the doubt.
Case title - Dr. Vijay Arora v. King George Medical University Thru. Registrar Lko And Others [WRIT - C No. - 2917 of 2020]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 403
The Allahabad High Court set aside a suspension order passed against a junior resident doctor who was restrained from taking up any medical work on the allegation that he had sexually abused the daughter of a patient
The Court noted that there was no allegation against the petitioner (a junior resident doctor) with regard to any misconduct of a sexual nature so as to warrant the punishment as had been awarded to him.With this, the bench of Justice Pankaj Bhatia allowed a writ plea moved by Dr. Vijay Arora challenging his suspension order passed by the management of the King George Medical University, Lucknow.
Case title - Pramod Kumar Singh And 5 Others v. State Of U.P. And 11 Others along with a connected plea [WRIT - A No. - 4225 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 404
The Allahabad High Court dismissed two pleas challenging criteria of different yardsticks for physical efficiency tests for males and females for the U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Board Excise Constable recruitment exam.
The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed that the classification of men and women in physical efficiency is not arbitrary and therefore, the allegation of discrimination between men and women is baseless and cannot be accepted.
"In the present recruitment, females have succeeded in huge numbers and it appears that unsuccessful male candidates are not able to cope up with the fact that female have overnumbered them in merit. It is an example of 'male chauvinism' which is unacceptable in twenty first century," the Court further remarked.
Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Tweeting Offensive Comments Against Hindu Women
Case title - Mohd. Saif Ali v. State of U.P [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31532 of 2022]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 405
The Allahabad High court has granted bail to one Mohd. Saif Ali, who has been accused of posting certain offensive tweets against the modesty of Hindu women. The Court observed that Said had made out a case of bail.
Essentially, the bench of Justice Deepak Verma ordered to release him bail in view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, and complicity of the accused.
Case title - Gufran Shaikh @ Gani Munawwar v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10258 of 2021]
Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 406
The Allahabad High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings in a POCSO case registered against a man as it noted that the accused man and victim-wife (who was a minor at the time of the incident) were 'happily' living with each other as husband and wife.
The bench of Justice Gautam Chowdhary granted bail to one Gufran Shaikh who had been booked under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989.
