High Courts Weekly Roundup [June 21, 2021 To June 27, 2020]

Allahabad High Court 1. Petitions In Allahabad High Court Challenging 'Love Jihad' Ordinance Dismissed As Withdrawn With Liberty To Challenge Act A Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Yadav and Justice Siddhartha Varma asked the Petitioners challenging the constitutional validity of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Ordinance to withdraw their petitions as infructuous, as the Ordinance has been replaced with an Act. The Court however issued notice on a PIL filed by the Association for Advocacy and Legal Initiatives through Advocate Vrinda Grover, challenging the Act of 2021. It has directed that the pleadings be completed in the case before the next date. The matter will be listed for arguments in the week commencing August 2nd, 2021. Also Read: Allahabad High Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Uttar Pradesh 'Love Jihad' Act 2. 'Prima Facie Raises Important Questions': Allahabad High Court Issues Notice On Pleas Against Demolition Of Gareeb Nawaz Mosque In UP [UP Sunni Central Waqf Board v. State of UP & Ors.] A Bench of Justices Saurabh Lavania and Rajan Roy issued notice on a writ petition filed by the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board, challenging the demolition of the Gareeb Nawaz Mosque in Uttar Pradesh's Barbanki District (Ram Sanehi Ghat area). All the opposite parties have been directed to file their counter affidavit in the matter, positively within 3 weeks. The case is fixed for hearing on July 23. It observed that the petitions prima facie raise important questions as to the existence of a Mosque on public utility land. It said that the petition also raises questions with regard to exercise of power by State authorities under Section 133 Cr.P.C. and other related provisions, its scope, especially the allegations of malafide exercise of power and the manner in which it has been done. 3. Underreporting Of Covid-19 Deaths In Uttar Pradesh: Plea In Allahabad High Court Seeks Death Audits [Ashma Izzat v. State of UP] A Division Bench of Justices Ritu Raj Awasthi and Dinesh Kumar Singh at Lucknow has relegated a PIL seeking audit of number of Covid-19 deaths in Uttar Pradesh, to bust the state's under-reporting regime, to the Chief Justice's Bench at Allahabad that is dealing with Covid related PILs. The Petitioner has also urged that, directions be issued to include Covid-19 deaths taking place at Covid Isolation Homes, in transit, homes of Covid-19 patients etc. A further prayer is made to direct the Respondents to provide information as to whether deaths related illness arising out of Covid-19 like Black Fungus, yellow fungus etc. are counted as Covid-19 related deaths or not. 4. Plea Praying That No Case Of Petitioner Be Listed Before A Particular Judge: Allahabad High Court Dismisses It With 20K Cost [Arun Mishra v. Allahabad High Court] A Division Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Anil Kumar Ojha dismissed a plea with 20,000/- cost in which the petitioner had prayed that no case filed by him be listed before a Court comprising a particular Judge. It observed that the prayer made by the petitioner was completely misconceived. The Court noted that the petition had been filed with a 'strange prayer' by impleading the High Court as a party respondent. The prayer was that certain writ petitions be listed before a Court not comprising a particular Judge. "It is well settled that the master of the roster is The Chief Justice. It is the prerogative of The Chief Justice as to before which Judge or Judges the matter is to be listed," the Court said. 5. "She Hasn't Even Filed Divorce Plea": Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea of Woman In Live-In Relation Seeking Protection Against Husband [Surabhi v. State Of UP & Ors.] A Bench of Justices Sunita Agarwal and Sadhna Rani (Thakur) dismissed a protection plea of a woman in a live-in relationship who alleged that she left her matrimonial house in view of the anti-social activities of his husband and is now living with one Mohit in a live-in relationship. In her plea, she asserted that a representation/application had been moved by her before the Chairman, Human Rights Commission, New Delhi, seeking protection from her husband. However, the Court noted: "It is admitted fact of the matter that the petitioner has not moved any application under the relevant provisions such as Domestic Violence Act and Indian Penal Code, for any threat or act of violence of her husband. It is admitted fact of the matter that the petitioner has not even filed any petition under Hindu Marriage Act for divorce." 6. Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To Student On Internship Accused Of Violating COVID Vaccine Clinical Trial Rules [Sudhakar Yadav v. State of UP] A Bench of Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav granted Bail to a student who has been accused of violating the COVID Vaccine clinical trial rules and involved in administering vaccines...

High Courts Weekly Roundup [June 21, 2021 To June 27, 2020]

Akshita Saxena & Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

High Courts Weekly Roundup [June 21, 2021 To June 27, 2020]

Akshita Saxena & Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers