Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: September 26 To October 2, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX State of U.P. v. Mukhtar Ansari 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 446 Ms. X Thru. Her Legal Guardian Bharat Lal v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 447 Gaya Prasad Yadav v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 448 Bundu And 13 Others v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 449 Pawan Mishra v. State of U.P. along with the connected appeal 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 450 Ambika Singh v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 451 Naval Kishor Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 452 Swami Chinmayanand Saraswati v. State Of U.P. And Anr 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 453 Sapna v. State of U.P. 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 454 Orders/Judgments of the Week Allahabad High Court Sentences Mukhtar Ansari To 5-Year Jail Under Gangsters Act In A 23-Year-Old Case Case title - State of U.P. v. Mukhtar Ansari [GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 779 of 2021] Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 446 The Allahabad High Court sentenced former UP MLA Mukhtar Ansari to 5 years in jail in connection with a 23-year-old case under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. With this, the bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh set aside a 2020 order passed by the MP-MLA court acquitting Ansari of charges under the Gangsters Act in a case that was registered against him in the year 1999. Allahabad High Court Directs DLSA To Take Requisite Steps For Payment Of Compensation To A 12-Year-Old Rape Survivor Case title - Ms. X Thru. Her Legal Guardian Bharat Lal v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others [WRIT - C No. - 6102 of 2022] Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 447 The Allahabad High Court directed the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Bahraich to take requisite steps to provide compensation to a 12-year-old Rape survivor whose unwanted pregnancy was terminated earlier this month as per HC's order. The bench of Justice Attau Rahman Masoodi and Justice Om Prakash Shukla has further asked the Secretary, DLSA to take up the matter with the district authorities and submit a report to the Senior Registrar of thE Court as to the outcome of such efforts taken for the payment of compensation to the victim or her family as per the prevailing scheme i.e. U.P. Victim Compensation Scheme, 2014. Only Governor Can Take Action Under Art. 351 Of CSR If Govt Servant Is Found Guilty Of Grave Misconduct After Retirement: Allahabad HC Case title - Gaya Prasad Yadav v. State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow And Anther [SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 408 of 2021] Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 448 The Allahabad High Court has held that after the retirement of a government servant, if such employee is found to be guilty of grave misconduct or is found to have caused pecuniary loss to the Government, it is the Governor who can take action as provided in Article 351-A of the Civil Service Regulations. With this, the Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Shree Prakash Singh held that the penalty of dismissal cannot be imposed on an officer/employee after his retirement after attaining the age of superannuation, however, withholding or withdrawing a pension and ordering the recovery from the pension is permissible and that too, by an order of the Governor as per the Article 351-A of the CSR. Victim Has No Right To Drop Case Of Non-Compoundable Offence Of Serious & Heinous Nature: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Bundu And 13 Others v. State of U.P. and Another Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 449 The Allahabad High Court observed that a victim has no right in law to drop the case of a non-compoundable offence of serious and heinous nature which badly affects society. The bench Justice Sameer Jain that such cases become a matter between the State and the accused and it is the duty of the State to ensure the law and order and to prosecute the offender in such cases. Previous Statement Of Deceased Admissible U/S 32 (1) Evidence Act If It Relates To Cause Of Death; Expectation Of Death Not Necessary: Allahabad HC Case title - Pawan Mishra v. State of U.P. along with the connected appeal Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 450 The Allahabad High Court has observed that in the event of the death of the victim, the statement made by her/his to any living person becomes relevant and admissible in evidence under Section 32 (1) of the Indian Evidence Act if the same relates to cause of her/his death. The bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Umesh Chandra Sharma further clarified that under Indian Law, it is not necessary that the person who made any declaration was actually expecting an assault that would kill him Acquittal Finding Can't Be Converted Into One Of Conviction In Exercise Of HC's Revisional Jurisdiction: Allahabad High...

Allahabad High Court Weekly Round Up: September 26 To October 2, 2022

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags