Allahabad High Court Weekly Round-Up: January 23 To January 29, 2023

Brijeash Saurabh Mishra @ Brijesh Mishra vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 32

Mohd. Aslam vs. State of U.P 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 33

Mohd. Ahmad Khan @ Ahmad Khan And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 34

Sajid @ Sajid Pardhan vs. State of U.P. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 35

Mohammad Azam Khan vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 36

Krishna Kumar (As Per Fir And The Charge Sheet Krishna Kumar Naayi ) And Others vs. State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home And 3 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 37

Lokendra Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 38

Dr.Priyanka Garg vs. State Of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Medical And Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 39

Ramji Prasad And 4 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 40

Nandini Sachan vs. State of U.P. and Another 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 41

ORDERS/JUDGMENTS OF THE WEEK

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.

Allahabad High Court Acquits Man Convicted In 2004 For Allegedly Killing 4 Persons Of A Family By Poisoning Them

Case title - Mohd. Aslam vs. State of U.P [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 530 of 2004]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 33

The Allahabad High Court acquitted a person convicted in the year 2004 for allegedly killing 4 persons of a family by mixing poison in their meat as it did not find credible evidence against him.

The bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav acquitted one Mohd. Aslam as it noted that though it was painful that four persons of the family were done to death by poisoning, however, the real culprit of the crime could not be brought to book.

Allahabad High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Rajyasabha MP Imran Pratapgarhi In 2019 MCC Violation Case

Cae title - Mohd. Ahmad Khan @ Ahmad Khan And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36651 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 34

The Allahabad High Court has quashed entire criminal proceedings against Rajyasabha MP and Congress leader pertaining to the 2019 Model Code of Conduct Violation case registered against him.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh quashed the entire proceedings of the case against Pratapgarhi and others, the cognizance order dated 02.07.2022 as well as the summoning order dated 10.10.2022 passed by Court of ACJM-04, District Moradabad.

Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Posting Objectionable Material Against UP CM Yogi Adityanath On FB

Case title - Sajid @ Sajid Pardhan vs. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50360 of 2022]

Case citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 35

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to a man accused of uploading some objectionable material on his Facebook account with regard to the Chief Minister of the state, Yogi Adityanath.

The Bench of Justice Sameer Jain passed this order as it noted that the offences under which the accused has been challaned are having maximum punishment of three years and the that he is in jail since September 2022 i.e. for about more than three months.

2007 'Provocative' Speech Case Against Azam Khan: Allahabad High Court Sets Aside UP Court's Order Taking Cognizance

Case title - Mohammad Azam Khan vs. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35405 of 2018]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 36

In a partial relief for former Uttar Pradesh Cabinet Minister and Senior Samajwadi Party Leader Azam Khan, the Allahabad High Court has set aside an order of the Firozabad Court taking cognizance of offence under Section 153-A IPC in the 2007 'provocative' and 'communal' speech case.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh observed that the offence under Section 153-A IPC is a serious offence, but the statute has created a bar for taking cognizance for such an offence unless there is a prior sanction of the competent authority i.e. State Government, which was not obtained in the present case.

Judicial Officers' Conduct In Passing Orders On Printed Proforma Sans Application Of Judicial Mind 'Objectionable': Allahabad HC

Case title - Krishna Kumar (As Per Fir And The Charge Sheet Krishna Kumar Naayi ) And Others vs. State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home And 3 Others [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 677 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 37

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the conduct of the judicial officers concerned in passing orders on printed proforma by filling up the blanks without application of judicial mind is objectionable and deserves to be deprecated.

The bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed thus while quashing the cognizance order of the Court of ASJ/POCSO-II Raibareli summoning a man accused of committing offences under Section 363, 366 I.P.C. and Sections 16 and 17 of POCSO Act, 2012.

Can't Cure Defect Of Non-Filing Of An Affidavit Supporting Election Plea At Filing Stage By Filing A Subsequent Affidavit: Allahabad HC

Case Title – Lokendra Singh vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others [WRIT - C No. - 39558 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 38

The Allahabad High Court has observed that the defect of non-filing an affidavit in support of an election petition at the stage of filing of an election petition cannot be cured by way of filing the subsequent affidavit.

The bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed thus while confirming an order of an election tribunal that rejected an election petition filed under Section 12-C of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 on the ground of non-filing of the affidavit.

Allahabad HC Quashes UP Govt’s Order Initiating Inquiry Against A Professor After Keeping Her Resignation Pending For 7 Months

Case Title – Dr.Priyanka Garg vs. State Of U.P.Thru.Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy.Medical And Ors. [WRIT - A No. - 23384 of 2020]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 39

The Allahabad High Court quashed an order of the State Medical Department initiating an inquiry against an associate professor working in a state medical college after keeping her resignation file pending for 7 months.

Taking into account the plight of the professor of medicine, who resigned as she was facing difficulty in handling her child while continuing her job with the State Government, the bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary stressed that any working woman, more particularly, a mother is required to be accommodated as far as possible.

S. 308 IPC| Intention Or Knowledge & Circumstances Under Which Act Committed Is Material, Not Injuries: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Ramji Prasad And 4 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 137 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 40

The Allahabad High Court has observed that for the purposes of constituting an offence under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code, what is the material is intention or knowledge and the circumstances in which the act has been done, and not the injuries.

The bench of Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi observed thus while upholding an order of the Sessions Judge, Varanasi rejecting the plea of discharge filed by a man accused of committing offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 504, 506 IPC.

"Section 308 IPC consists of two parts. The first is related to no-injury cases while the second part deals with where the hurt is caused. So what is the material is intention or knowledge and the circumstances in which the act has been done and not the injuries," the Court observed.

Freedom Of Expression Doesn't Give Citizens The Right To Speak Sans Responsibility On Social Media: Allahabad High Court

Case title - Nandini Sachan vs. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38967 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 41

The Allahabad High Court observed that the freedom of expression does not confer upon the citizens the right to speak without responsibility on social media nor does it grant an unfettered license for every possible use of language.

"...it is beyond the shadow of a doubt that social media is a global platform for the exchange of thoughts, opinions, and ideas. The internet and social media have become important tool through which individuals can exercise their right to freedom of expression but the right to freedom of expression comes with its own set of special responsibilities and duties. It does not confer upon the citizens the right to speak without responsibility nor does it grant an unfettered license for every possible use of language," the bench of Justice Shehar Kumar Yadav said.

Other updates of the week

Non-Payment Of Compensation To 84 Y/O Man Who Lost Wife, Daughter In 1984 Riots, Allahabad HC Seeks Affidavit Of UP Govt Secy

While hearing a plea filed by an 84-year-old man seeking compensation for the loss of his wife and daughter in the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots, the Allahabad High Court has sought a personal affidavit of the Secretary, Home (Communal Control Cell), Government of U.P.

The bench of Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Vivek Kumar Singh passed this order on the plea of one Pyara Singh as it noted that the claim of the petitioner is admitted and the matter is pending since 2018.