All High Courts Weekly Roundup: January 3 - January 9, 2022

Allahabad High Court 1. 'Prayers Omnibus In Nature': Allahabad High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL On Alleged Corruption In MadarsasCase Title - Mohammad Imran v. State Of U.P.Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 1The High Court refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by a farmer to point out corruption in the appointment of teaching and non-teaching staff in certain Madarsas as the Court noted that the plea contained omnibus prayers."...it is apparent that the prayers, instead of being specific, are omnibus in nature. The prayer to issue such directions is absolutely vague and general in nature," The Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed after perusing the prayers of the PIL.2. Man Allegedly Commits Rape By A False Promise To Marry, Threatens Victim To Accept Islam: Allahabad HC Denies Him BailCase Title - Farhan Ahmad (Shanu) v. State Of U.P Thru Secretary Home Lknw.Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 2The High Court denied bail to a man accused of committing Rape by establishing a physical relationship with the Victim on a false promise to marry her and thereafter, threatening her to accept the Muslim religion.The Bench of Justice Om Prakash Tripathi was dealing with the bail plea of one Farhan Ahmad (Shanu) who contended that he is innocent and had been falsely implicated in the case only for the purpose of blackmailing.3. Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL Against ECI's Order Granting 'National Party' Status To BJP, Congress, Allotting Symbols To ThemCase Title - Sheshmani Nath Tripathi v. E.C.I.Thru. Chief Election Commissioner,New Delhi & AnrCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 3The High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea which sought quashing of the order of recognition given to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Indian National Congress (INC) as National Parties by the Election Commissions of India (ECI) and further, allotting symbols to them.Essentially, the Bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Saroj Yadav was hearing a PIL filed by the petitioner, Sheshmani Nath Tripathi (leader of Samajwadi Party) challenging the 1989 order by the ECI recognizing BJP and INC as a National Party and reserving "Lotus" and "Hand" symbols for them.4. 'Private Interest Subservient To Larger Public Interest Even In There Are Some Discrepancies': Allahabad HC In Land Acquisition MatterCase Title- Smt. Prabha Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh & OrsCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 4The Allahabad High Court has recently held in a case challenging land acquisition proceedings that private interest has to give way to the larger public interest.Upholding the proceedings for construction of a railway over-bridge, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Piyush Agarwal observed,"Private interest has to give way to the larger public interest. Even if there are some small discrepancies in the process of acquisition, in our opinion in the facts of the present case, the acquisition does not deserve to be set aside as otherwise the project will be delayed which will cause loss to the State besides suffering to the residents of the area, who may be deprived of using the railway over-bridge on account of delayed completion of the project. In any case, the petitioner will be duly compensated for the land owned by her."5. Allahabad High Court Directs DM To Decide On Compensation In Case Of A Teacher's COVID Death During Election DutyCase Title - Aryan Srivastava v. State Of U.P. And 3 OthersCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 5The High Court directed the District Magistrate, Jaunpur to examine and pass a reasoned order in a claim for compensation made in a case of a teacher's death who died due to COVID during the Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Polls last year.The Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan was hearing the plea of one Aryan Srivastava whose mother was assigned election duty in UP Panchayat Elections during which she contracted COVID-19 and died thereafter.6. Offence Punishable U/S 506 IPC If Committed In Uttar Pradesh Is A Cognizable Offence: Allahabad High CourtCase Title - Rakesh Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and AnotherCase Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 6The High Court observed that an offence under Section 506 IPC (Punishment for criminal intimidation), if committed in the State of Uttar Pradesh is a cognizable offenceTo conclude thus, the Bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi referred to a notification published in the U.P. Gazette dated 31st July 1989, notifying the declaration made by the then Hon'ble Governor of UP that any offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC when committed in Uttar Pradesh, shall be cognizable and non-bailable.7. [O. 41 R. 17(1) CPC] If Counsel Refuses To Argue Or Not Able To Address Court, Appeal Can't Be Dismissed On Merits: Allahabad HCCase Title - Janki Prasad v. Sanjay ...

All High Courts Weekly Roundup: January 3 - January 9, 2022

Shrutika Pandey

Tags